Tishah b’Av 5784: Does Hashem Still Listen to Our Prayers?
One would assume the answer is "yes," but a midrash about the destruction of Mikdash indicates otherwise. What does this midrash teach us about the loss of Mikdash and our tefilah nowadays?
The Torah Content for the first two weeks of August has been sponsored by Avital, "in gratitude for all the incredible brachah in my life right now and Mishlei and Stoicism for helping me handle it. Thank you Rabbi!"
Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.
Tishah b’Av 5784: Does Hashem Still Listen to Our Prayers?
In the most personal chapter of Eichah, Yirmiyahu ha’Navi laments: “Even when I cry and call out, He blocks my prayer” (Eichah 3:8). The pshat (straightforward meaning) of this verse is that Hashem refused to respond to Yirmiyahu’s personal pleas. However, R’ Elazar (Berachos 32b; Bava Metzia 59a) interprets this universally:
R' Elazar said: From the day the Beis ha'Mikdash (Holy Temple) was destroyed, the shaarei tefilah (gates of prayer) have been closed, as it is said: “Even when I cry and call out, He blocks my prayer.” But even though the shaarei tefilah are closed, the shaarei dim'ah (gates of tears) are not closed, as it is stated: “Hear my prayer, Hashem, and give ear to my pleading, keep not silent at my tears” (Tehilim 39:13).
This statement raises several issues. First, how can the shaarei tefilah ever be closed? In this week’s parashah, Moshe Rabbeinu exclaims, “For which is a great nation that has a God Who is close to it, as is Hashem, our God, whenever we call to Him?” (Devarim 4:7). David ha’Melech assures us that “Hashem is close to all who call Him, to all who call Him in truth” (ibid. 145:18). Thus, on both a national and individual level, the gates of tefilah remain open. Second, if the gates of tefilah are closed, why daven at all? Lastly, what are the shaarei dim’ah, and how do they function? Does God truly make an exception for tears alone?
One of the most important principles in the methodology of midrash aggadah (Scriptural homilies) is that we don’t bring proofs or refutations from aggadah.[1] If we know something to be true and encounter a midrash aggadah that seems to contradict it, we interpret the aggadah in light of our established knowledge—not the other way around. In this case, we know that Hashem is shome’a tefilah (He Who listens to prayer). R’ Elazar cannot mean that Hashem outright rejects all tefilos except those accompanied by tears. The Meiri (Bava Metzia 59b) concurs:
Even though it is impossible for extensive tefilah to go unanswered, nevertheless, when it comes from the depths of the heart and overflows into tears, such a tefilah is even more [worthy of being] accepted. [The Sages] poetically expressed this by saying that from the day the Beis ha’Mikdash was destroyed, the shaarei tefilah are closed, but even though the shaarei tefilah are closed, the shaarei dim’ah are not closed.
According to the Meiri, it is impossible to say that God categorically rejects every dry-eyed tefilah. Instead, R’ Elazar’s statement reflects the Gemara’s principle that “the Torah spoke in hyperbole, the Prophets spoke in hyperbole, and the Sages spoke in hyperbole” (Tamid 29a).[2] In other words, when R’ Elazar said that the shaarei tefilah are closed and the shaarei dim’ah are open, he didn’t mean “absolutely.” He spoke hyperbolically to convey that our regular tefilos are less acceptable before God, whereas tefilos accompanied by tears are more acceptable to Him. This answers the question of why we still daven and provides a framework for addressing our questions about what the shaarei tefilah and shaarei dim’ah are, and how they function.
To answer these questions, we need to understand the allegory of gates. The Maharsha (Chidushei Aggadah to Bava Metzia 59b) provides a clue: “This may be compared to a human king who is angry and closes the gates of his courtyard before his servants; [so too,] extensive tefilah and mercy before God are necessary in order for Him to open that gate.” In other words, “the shaarei tefilah are closed” does not mean that Hashem hears our tefilos and rejects them, but that He refuses to allow us to approach Him with our tefilos at all. Hashem is shome’a every tefilah said in His presence, but that doesn’t automatically give everyone a right to stand in His presence.
To understand what this means, we need to review the basic definition of tefilah. Unlike the English word “pray,” which comes from the Latin “precari,” meaning “to entreat,” “to ask earnestly,” or “to beg,” the root of the Hebrew word tefilah (תפלה) is P.L.L. (פ.ל.ל.), which means “to judge” or “to evaluate.” The verb we use for prayer is “le’hitpalel” (להתפלל), in the reflexive form, meaning “to judge oneself” or “to self-evaluate.” Thus, “le’hitpalel la’Shem” means “to evaluate and judge oneself within God’s framework”—that is, the framework of objective reality, through “the eyes of God,” so to speak. When we engage in shevach (praise), we reflect on who we are in relation to Him, and how our middos (character traits) measure up to the standards set by His middos (modes of action). When we engage in bakashah (request), we reflect on what our needs are (or should be), how little control we have over their attainment, and how He is the Provider of all our needs. And when we engage in hodaah (thanksgiving), we reflect on all the good He has bestowed upon us, despite our unworthiness.
We can now explain what it means to say that we are barred from engaging in tefilah (self-judgment) in God’s presence: the destruction of the Beis ha’Mikdash rendered us incapable of accurate introspection. The strongest evidence for this is that the Anshei Kneses ha’Gedolah (Men of the Great Assembly) were compelled to write out our tefilos, rather than allowing us to continue formulating them individually and spontaneously, as we had before. The Rambam (Hilchos Tefilah u’Birkas Kohanim 1:4) writes:
Once Israel was exiled in the days of the wicked Nevuchadnetzar, [the Jews] assimilated into Persia, Greece, and the other nations. They begat offspring in the lands of the nations, and the language of those offspring became mixed, with each person’s language intermingled with many others. When one of them would speak, he was unable to formulate all his needs in one language—only in a confusion ... Because of this, when one of them would daven, his language was too deficient to ask for his needs or to declare the praise of Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu in the holy language without other languages being mixed in. Once Ezra and his court saw this, they arose and enacted eighteen blessings in order (i.e. the amidah or shemoneh esrei).
The problem was not the foreign languages per se, as is clear from the halacha that “all blessings may be said in any language” (Hilchos Berachos 1:6). Rather, the problem was that every language embodies and reinforces the ideas and values of its culture. Our assimilation into other nations corrupted our ideas and values, making it impossible to accurately assess our true needs or praise God without our thoughts and words being diluted by these foreign elements. All of this happened as a result of the destruction of the Mikdash, which had served as a cultural center and touchstone for our philosophy and values, both as a nation and as individuals.
If we understand “the gates of tefilah are closed” to mean that accurate self-judgment is nearly impossible in a post-Mikdash world, then what does it mean that “the gates of tears remain open”? Perhaps we can answer by positing that this does not refer to just any tears. Rather, it refers specifically to tears that spring from our recognition of how impaired we are in our tefilah as a result of the destruction of the Mikdash and the resulting exile. Those who obliviously attempt to approach God without any awareness of their warped self-knowledge are precisely the ones He wishes to bar from entry into His courtyard. Why should He grant them an audience if they don’t even realize how incapable they are of self-judgment? But those who recognize the loss of the Mikdash and are keenly aware of its impact on their ability to engage in an objective self-evaluation will be moved to tears by their distance from the King. These are the servants whom the King is willing to allow entry. The recognition of our inability to stand before God, in itself, functions as a matir (license) granting us entry to His presence.
It can be difficult to translate our mourning over the Mikdash into teshuvah. Perhaps this can serve as a starting point: a recognition that the loss of Mikdash has impeded our ability to stand before our Creator by rendering us incapable of self-knowledge. Our yearning for this closeness to God is a first step toward mending the relationship.
[1] In the writings of the Geonim alone, this is mentioned in Saadia Gaon, Miluim to Chagigah 68, cited in Otzar ha'Geonim; R' Sherira Gaon, cited in Sefer ha'Eshkol Hilchos Sefer Torah 60a; R' Shmuel ben Chofni Gaon, cited in Radak's commentary to I Shmuel 28:24; R' Hai Gaon, cited in Otzar ha'Geonim Chagigah 67; see my shiur, “Midrashic Betrayal” for many more sources.
[2] see R’ Avraham ben ha’Rambam’s treatise on aggadah re: 5th category of midrash and 3rd category of Talmudic anecdote
What do you think of this interpretation of R’ Elazar’s statement, or of this idea in general? Do you have an alternative explanation? If so, I’d love to hear!
Like what you read? Give this article a “like” and share it with someone who might appreciate it!
Want access to my paid content without actually paying? If you successfully refer enough friends, you can get access to the paid tier for free!
Interested in reading more? Become a free subscriber, or upgrade to a paid subscription for the upcoming exclusive content!
If you've gained from what you've learned here, please consider contributing to my Patreon at www.patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss. Alternatively, if you would like to make a direct contribution to the "Rabbi Schneeweiss Torah Content Fund," my Venmo is @Matt-Schneeweiss, and my Zelle and PayPal are mattschneeweiss at gmail. Even a small contribution goes a long way to covering the costs of my podcasts, and will provide me with the financial freedom to produce even more Torah content for you.
If you would like to sponsor a day's or a week's worth of content, or if you are interested in enlisting my services as a teacher or tutor. Thank you to my listeners for listening, thank you to my readers for reading, and thank you to my supporters for supporting my efforts to make Torah ideas available and accessible to everyone.
-----
Substack: rabbischneeweiss.substack.com/
Patreon: patreon.com/rabbischneeweiss
YouTube: youtube.com/rabbischneeweiss
Instagram: instagram.com/rabbischneeweiss/
"The Stoic Jew" Podcast: thestoicjew.buzzsprout.com
"Machshavah Lab" Podcast: machshavahlab.buzzsprout.com
"The Mishlei Podcast": mishlei.buzzsprout.com
"Rambam Bekius" Podcast: rambambekius.buzzsprout.com
"The Tefilah Podcast": tefilah.buzzsprout.com
Old Blog: kolhaseridim.blogspot.com/
WhatsApp Content Hub (where I post all my content and announce my public classes): https://chat.whatsapp.com/GEB1EPIAarsELfHWuI2k0H
Amazon Wishlist: amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/Y72CSP86S24W?ref_=wl_sharel
Food for thought. Alternatively, Meiri elsewhere may shed light on what he means in BM. Elsewhere Meiri explains similar talmudic statements as meaning that specific places/times are more conducive for concentration/teshuvah. Eg מאירי שבת י"ב::ב'
לעולם אל ישאל אדם צרכיו בלשון ארמי שמתוך שאין הלשון שגור בפי הבריות אין הכונה מצויה בדבריו עד שתהא תפלתו מקובלת ומ"מ כל לענין חולה מתוך שאדם מכוין בתפלתו ביותר אין בזה בית מיחוש וכן כתבו הגאונים בתפלת הציבור שהוא בכל לשון מטעם זה שהציבור שכינה עמהם ר"ל שכונתם מצויה הרבה: & המאירי יומא פ"ה:
אמר המאירי חטאת ואשם ודאי מכפרין ר"ל על העונות שהם באים עליהם שבודאי יש תשובה ווידוי עמהם שאם לא כן לא היה מזקיק עצמו לכך ומ"מ אשם תלוי אינו מכפר לגמרי שהרי לכשיודע לו צריך לקרבן אחר כמו שביארנו במקומו מיתה ויום הכפורים מכפרין עם התשובה שזהו כלל גדול שאין שום דבר מכפר אלא בתשובה התשובה ר"ל לבד בלא מיתה ובלא יום הכפרים מכפרת על עבירות קלות על עשה ועל לא תעשה אבל על החמורות כגון כריתות ומיתות בית דין תשובה [תולה] עד שיבוא יום הכפורים ויכפר כלומר שתכלית התשובה נמצאת בו ומ"מ הוא הדין שהתשובה הגמורה מכפרת בכל עת שאין הפרגוד ננעל בפני התשובה אלא שסתם הדברים שהיא נמצאת שלימה יותר בזמן הזה משאר הזמנים:. Perhaps in BM as well he means that the awesomeness of having the mikdash in our midst puts us in a state of mind that lends itself to deeper and more meaningful tefilah.