Avodah Mailing List

Volume 09 : Number 001

Thursday, March 14 2002

• haGR"A on the yetzer hora of tamidei chachomim, etc. - elaboration
• Re: Matzo He'oros from my Brother in Law
• Re: haGR"A on the yetzer hora of tamidei chachomim, etc. - elaboration
• Re: newspapers on Shabbat
• re: Jewish People and the Torah
• re: Segulos
• Re: Segulos
• re: newspapers on Shabbat
• Re: YKK-Correction
• Re: YKK-Correction
• Re: YKK-Correction
• Re:Re: YKK-Correction
• RE: Re: YKK/ haftara only
• Re:RE: Re: YKK/ haftara only
• Re: Re: YKK/ haftara only
• RE: RE: Re: YKK/ haftara only
• Re:RE: RE: Re: YKK/ haftara only
• Vaychal on 1/2-day Taaneisim/YKK
• Re: Does a talmid chacham have a yetzer hora?
• Haftara on Yom Ha'Atzma'ut
• taking out wrong sefer Torah
• One start at a cheshbon hanefesh
• what we daven for?

To elaborate / clarify a bit more on what is brought bishem HaGR"A on
this, here is what it says in sefer 'Even Shleima' 4:11....(remarks in
parentheses are from notes on even shleima or parentheses in text).

"Hatalmid chochom tzorich shemira yiseiroh miyetzer hora mipnei shebo
misgoreh biyoseir (ukimo bo'odom, shekol hagodol mechaveiro yitzro godol
heimenu - kein bimitzvos utefillos - kol dovor shehu yoseir godol,
liumas zeh hayeitzer hora yoseir godol, vitzorich lizoheir yoseir -
vizehu sheomru 'liolom yihei odom zohir bitefilas hamincha...[tikkunei
Zohar 72) , kimo sheomeir (Sukkah 52) - vizehu echad mitaanos hapisaim
haporshim milimudom biomrom shekasheh lahem laamod bimilchemes hayetzer
hora - aval be'emes ein zeh rak bitchilas limudom, aval kishemisgadeil
baTorah nitzol miyetzer hora ligamri (Mishlei 22 : 13 - 16 : 7 - 15 :19
- Zohar Shelach 160) - vigam ein tzorich likoneis likedusha bidochek -
vigam yuchal likpotz bikal mimadreigah limadreigah (Misheli 4 : 14 -
vigam meigin olov miyeitzer hora hachitzon sheheim habriyos hamaligim
olov [Mishlei 18 : 11]) - vichol hatachbulos shel hamidos, shene'emar
'bitachbulos taaseh licho milchomo' vihu kol maseches Ovos - hakol bimi
she'ein Toroso umnoso - aval kol haoseik biTorah lishmo zoche lidvorim
harbeh....umalbashto anovo viyiroh......(kein kosav Rabbeinu bibiuro
liaggodos, Brochos 89 dibur hamaschil 'hamakiz dam' al mah sheomar [Bava
Basra 58] bireish kol marein ana dam, rotzo lomar rosh kol hachatoim
- uvireish kol asvan ana chamar - rotzo lomar, haTorah, kimo sheomar
hafoch bah vohafoch bah dichola bah.....ukimo sheomar (Kiddushin 30
[?]) visamtem-sam tam.....biasar dileis chamar, taman samimonim misbain -
rotzo lomar, shekol hatachbulos.....).

Ad kan mehaEven Shleimah
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Derech agav - re the seeming problem of getting a bigger yetzer hora
when getting bigger in ruchniyus ........ I have thought that in
actuality this may not be as big a problem as it may seem at first,
for the following reason - while it's true that the yeitzer hora becomes
bigger when one gets bigger, correspondingly one's ruchnius is getting
stronger at the same time...so both sides are increasing in power (zeh
liumas zeh....) - so the spiritual 'balance of power' stays basically
the same licheorah....Also, Hashem doesn't give a person a nisoyon that
they cannot handle, generally speaking........

Mordechai 

On 10 Mar 2002 at 4:16, Yosef Gavriel and Shoshanah M. Bechhofer 
wrote:

> Two e-mails cobbled together, only slightly edited by me.
> YGB

> >Makes sense that the bread Avraham made was kemach soles, as per din
> >in S"A of using soles nekiya for afiyas matzah.  Also, he says to
> >Sarah "mahari" - so that there should be no chashash chametz. 
> >However, no korban pesach till yitzchak giving the berachos to
> >ya'akov, and there no matzah is mentioned. If you insist the food is
> >significant, you have to explain the meaning of the meat, the milk,
> >and the butter as well.  Good Luck!

I thought that Leil Ha'Seder was when the Malachim reached Lot. If 
that's correct, why would Sarah have been preparing Matza to serve to 
the Malachim on Erev Pesach? 

> >MahaRiL Diskin is medayek that although Sarah prepares 3 sa'ah of
> >dough, Avraham says lushi ugos because 3 sa'ah exceeds the shiur
> >lisha for matzah (ayen sham, I simplified what he wrote a bit).  2
> >more cents of my own: maybe that's why Yishmael was given the job of
> >shchita and not matzah baking - gadol omeid al gabav works for a
> >katan who is a mumcheh for shchita (20=shiur gadlus kodem matan
> >torah) but not for lishma by matzah (haven't worked this out 100%,
> >but I'll toss it out anyway to get the wheels turning).

Yishmael was 13 at the time and should not have been a katan. The 
question re: Yishmael is whether he had the din of a Jew b'chlal. 
IIRC omed alav would also work for shchitas goy. 

-- Carl

Please daven and learn for a Refuah Shleima for our son,
Baruch Yosef ben Adina Batya among the sick of Israel.  
Thank you very much.

In a message dated 3/12/02 12:01:58pm EST, Phyllostac@aol.com writes:
> Derech agav - re the seeming problem of getting a bigger yetzer hora
> when getting bigger in ruchniyus ........ I have thought that in
> actuality this may not be as big a problem as it may seem at first,
> for the following reason - while it's true that the yeitzer hora becomes
> bigger when one gets bigger, correspondingly one's ruchnius is getting
> stronger at the same time...so both sides are increasing in power (zeh
> liumas zeh....) ...

Rav Matis Weinberg does not consider this a reasonable way of looking
at the issue, for the following reasons:

1) If the Talmid Chochom's Yeitzer Tov:Yeitzer Hara ratio remains
constant, then the maamar Chazal is rendered meaningless.

2) The example provided by the Gemara, where Abaye ?) followed two people
into a forest, assuming they were going to behave inappropriately,
implies that Abaye's yeitzer was /proportionately/ greater than the
bochur he was following.

Shlomo Simon wrote:
>The general practice is certainly to read the paper on Shabbos (excluding 
>the business section). I know however that some poskim forbid having the 
>paper delivered ob Shabbos. What is their reason, and what do the meikilim 
>say to counter this objection?

Newspapers are printed and delivered from outside the techum on Shabbat.
Some argue that the printing is nolad but others disagree.

More importantly is that if you have the paper delivered then this paper
is printed and delivered for you on Shabbos. A melacha is done for you
by a nochri which is forbidden as amirah lenochri. Others counter that
it is not done specifically for you and therefore does not fall under
amirah lenochri.

I heard one prominent posek distinguish between a Jewish newspaper
(e.g. The Jewish Press) that is delivered on Shabbos (or, more likely,
on Yom Tov) because almost everyone to whom the newspaper is delivered
is Jewish. Therefore, the delivery is for Jews. Others counter that
the delivery is just part of the normal mail service which is not done
specifically for Jews.

A totally different question is whether newspapers fall under the
prohibition against reading shtarei hedyotos, are in the spirit of
Shabbos, or - can I say it without seeming like a kannai? - bittul Torah.

Gil Student

From: "Gil Student" <gil_student@hotmail.com>
> I seem to recall that Rav Saadia Gaon wrote that the single uniting
> factor of the Jewish people is the Torah. I can't find that statement....

Yes, it was HaRav Saadia Gaon who said it in Emunot V'Deot Ma'Amer Gimmel.
"Ki Umateinu Einnena Uma Ki Im B'Toroteinu" The word "Toroteinu" which
literally means "Torahs" in the plural is used because HaRav Saadia Gaon was
fighting the heresies of the Karites at that time who only believed in one
Torah i.e. the written
aharon

R' Micha Berger wrote <<< ...segulologists can make a formal study of
segulos. The native notion is one that becomes "common sense", so that
people take these things for granted when deciding what to do. Like the
way someone knows that throwing a rock just so is likely to hurt a person
standing over there. >>>

(A)

If our source for information about effective segulos is empirical
observation of causes and effects in this world, then I don't understand
why it should matter who it was that figured it out:

If a baby or a typical adult could have figured it out, then it is
certainly teva at work. If typical adult could *not* have figured it out,
but a learned scientist did, then again, teva is at work, and admiration
goes to the scientist.

If a segulologist figured it out, then I have two choices: I can choose to
suspect that the effect is due to some teva-dik principle which science
has yet to discover. Or I can choose to believe that it is truly an
upper-worldly phenomenon.

But because I have that choice, it seems to me that bechira chofshis is
totally preserved!

There are things which occur in this world that seem to defy explanation,
and suggest that there is a G-d Who controls them. Depending on the
understanding which I, or you, or the baby, has of the world's workings,
some phenomena will be in that category, and others will not. (This all
goes into where the individual's Bechira Point lies.) But no matter what,
there is only a *suggestion* that an "upper world" is involved, *never*
a proof.

And there cannot ever be such a proof, because (I believe) that it is
categorically impossible for the Upper World to be empirically observed
from within the Lower World. The only exceptions to that rule is Nevuah
and Nes Galuy, which we all agree pose problems to bechira. (see below)

(B)

But if our source for information about effective segulos is some sort
of kabbalah received from Hashem, or a malach, or some other Upper
World source, then I would tend to agree with R' Micha's initial point
(the one that started this whole thread) that our knowedge of the Upper
World forces our bechira to be somewhat less than totally free.

On a practical level though, I think the great majority of people find
the whole concept of segulos to be sufficiently questionable as to restore
totally free will. In other words, each person to his own level of emunah,
will have his bechira point at a proper level.

Akiva Miller

Not for the first time, I think I now understand what's going on.
Early on, I had cited a Ramban (Parshath Shoftim 18:9) which postulated
a continuum of natural -> supernatural law. I had thought we were
following his position.
Then

Micha Berger wrote:
> Not at all. Because germs and dolphins are made of chomer, exist in
> olam ha'asiyah. Sheidim exist without chomer, and need not enter
> the olam ha'asiyah.

But the Ramban says explicitly (e.g., Acharei Moth 17:7) that sheidim
are made of fire and air.

I should have realized this sooner, since, in an earlier post you wrote:
> I'm not arguing that segulos prove the existance of G-d. Rather they
> argue for the existance of a soul.

Whereas the Ramban (e.g. VaEra 6:2) says that the Torah never promises
rewards for the soul after death because anyone knowledgable in science
can deduce that the soul is so rewarded.

So now I have a new problem. Before this exchange began I knew of two
opinions about segulos:

1. The Rambam and his associates: they don't work.

2. The Ramban, the Zohar, and their associates: there is a continuum
of natural -> supernatural law, and segulos are in the middle of the
continuum.

Now you have introduced me to:

3. There is radical discontinuity between the natural and the supernatural
(above olam haasiyah), and the soul is part of the supernatural, as
are segulos.

Before we ask kashes on 3, perhaps you could identify a classical Jewish
source which follows this position. After all the definition of hester
panim is subject to argument, and your kasha may be a result of conflating
multiple opinions.

David Riceman

R' Shlomo Simon asked <<< The general practice is certainly to read the
paper on Shabbos (excluding the business section). I know however that
some poskim forbid having the paper delivered on Shabbos. What is their
reason, and what do the meikilim say to counter this objection? >>>

This is discussed in Shmiras Shabbass K'Hilchasa 31:24. Both views are
mentioned, especially if you go through the footnotes in the Hebrew
section.

I think it might be summarized as: If there is no Eruv in the city,
forget it. If there is an Eruv, then the problem is that the non-Jews
did extra work (both printing and delivering) than they would have done,
if not for your subscription. The halachos of when a non-Jew works on
Shabbos *mostly* for the benefit of himself and/or other non-Jews, *but*
works some extra for Jews, get pretty complicated.

A significant part of the complication is that there is no particular
newspaper that was made for you. They're all the same. Not until the
delivery guy puts one at your door does it become clear which newspaper
was printed and delivered for you. Until then, they were all for the
general subscriber base, which is mostly non-Jews. (This makes it very
different than cases involving delivery of mail or packages.)

We can easily imagine that in such a multi-faceted situation, many poskim
will come down as strict or lenient on different points.

Akiva Miller

[An entire conversation bounced from Areivim. -mi]

From: Gershon Dubin <gershon.dubin@juno.com>
> Correction to the previous post: the YKK davening at ... will NOT have
> kerias haTorah.

Assuming that the problem is the lack of a sefer Torah, not the lack of
10 fasters, does anyone know whether the haftorah should be said despite
the lack of laining?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 19:52:49 -0500 "Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM>
writes:
> Assuming that the problem is the lack of a sefer Torah, not the lack 
> of 10 fasters, does anyone know whether the haftorah should be said 
> despite the lack of laining?

The problem is that the owner of the sefer Torah was advised by his
LOR not to take it for kerias haTorah if there were not definitely ten
fasters, as distinct from a taanis tzibur when there definitely are.

Heichan matzinu a haftara without kerias haTorah?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

RGD wrote:
> Heichan matzinu a haftara without kerias haTorah?

Don't they do that on Yom Haatzmaut in Israel?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

"Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM> writes:
:Don't they do that on Yom Haatzmaut in Israel?

I am aware of that and chose mipnei darkei shalom not to mention it.
Now that you did, what is the halachic basis for that? Haftara AFAIK
requires keria baTorah techila.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

From: Gershon Dubin [mailto:gershon.dubin@juno.com]
>                            ... what is the halachic basis for 
> that?  Haftara AFAIK requires keria baTorah techila.  

I'm very vague on this, but wasn't there a period when Jews were forbidden
from reading the Torah and read the haftara instead.

Kol tuv,
Moshe

"Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM> writes:
:I'm very vague on this, but wasn't there a period when Jews were
:forbidden from reading the Torah and read the haftara instead.

I am likewise vague on this, but in any event you're giving an historical
source; I'm looking for an halachic one.

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 11:16:14AM -0500, Feldman, Mark wrote:
: I'm very vague on this, but wasn't there a period when Jews were forbidden
: from reading the Torah and read the haftara instead.

The haftora was created in the days of Jesdegard, who banned public
torah reading. So the haftora was created to be read instead.

However, to use this as a maqor would be: 1- ladun es ha'efshar meishe'i
efshar, and 2- drawing a conclusion from the event to the din enacted to
commemorate it.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

From: Gershon Dubin [mailto:gershon.dubin@juno.com]
> I am likewise vague on this,  but in any event you're giving 
> an historical source;  I'm looking for an halachic one.

Why isn't that a halachic source?  If kadmonim did it, surely it is
permissible halachically.

Also, here--unlike Yom Haatzmaut--we are talking about a haftara which
should have followed a kriyas hatorah, but for the fact that no torah
was available. MB OC 143:9 says that when no sefer torah is available in
a town, they should read from a chumash w/o calling people to the torah
in order "shelo tishtakach toras kriyah". Any thoughts about this source
(don't have the time now to research further)?

Kol tuv,
Moshe

"Feldman, Mark" <MFeldman@CM-P.COM> writes:
:Why isn't that a halachic source?  If kadmonim did it, surely it is
:permissible halachically.

Kadmonim didn't choose to do it; they had no choice. Same as reading
from the chumash shelo tishtakach, in your example.

Can you compare this to a ta'anis which is not even agreed upon as a
ta'anis-most of the announcements refer to tefila, tehilim, etc.-what
shelo tishtakach is there?

Gershon
gershon.dubin@juno.com

[Bounced from Areivim. -mi]

From: kennethgmiller@juno.com
> R' Moshe Feldman writes <<< AIUI, so long as there are 10 people fasting,
> you can lein Vay'chal. According to the Ramo (quick reading of it--so double
> check), if you are fasting half a day and are still fasting at the time of
> mincha, you can say Aneinu in your private shmone esrei (but not the
> chazaras hashatz). >>>

> I think you hit squarely on what R' SBA was asking:

> If you have a minyan of people who are planning on a half-day fast, but
> still have not yet eaten at mincha, then the *individuals* CAN say aneinu,
> but the *tzibur* (personified in the shatz) CANNOT say it. This seems to
> suggest that such a minyan CANNOT lein, doesn't it?

Some years ago I asked this shaaloh from someone (as we here usually
have a minyan 1/2-day fasters on Eruv RC Ellul - when some of us say
YKK at midday - in addition to the usual (almost-monthly) evening minyan
for YKK).

I sem to recall that I was told Vaychal can only be leined if fasting
all day.

I discussed it with someone tonight and although he agreed, he hadn't
yet found a clear source.

Meanwhile I continued my research and came up with SA OC 662:11 where it
seems quite clear from the Mechaber the a half day fast isn't considered
a Taanis. Ayin Shom.

BTW how many here on the list say YKK when Klall Yisroel isn't under
stress?

Our Shul continues minhag Ashkenaz and says it whenever due (I think
about 9 out of 12 months).

I understand that in the Shul and Yeshivas of both Rav Wosner shlit'a in
BB and Rav Dushinsky shlit'a in Jerusalem - although the nussach is S'fard
- they have continued the YKK tradition. (Both have Oberlender yichus.)

And finally, could all those who said it today, have a look at the last
piece of the vidui of Rabenu Nissim and tell me if this is written/said
with tongue in cheek or with the hope that the RSO has - kaveyochel -
a sense of humor...

I am referring to "RSO lulei chato'einu...lo hoyinu boshim...v'al mah
hoyinu misvadim? Ki ee efshar lo le'odom levakesh al cheit vehu lo choto!
Velo yivodah oz rachmecho eloh behaavircho chatos yere'echo...." Which
seems to me that we are telling HKBH, it's a good thing that we do aveiros
- this way (by forgiving them) You can show your great rachmonus etc.

Or am I learning totally wrong pshat???

Bichlall the whole flow and content of that paragraph needs some
explaining LAD.

SBA

On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 09:02:22PM -0500, yosef stern wrote:
: To further illustrate my question the Gemara says in Sukkah (52:1)
: The Tzaddikim are going to wonder 'how where we able to conquer it
: (-the Yetzer Horah)?'
: Now, if they didn't have one how did they conquer it?
...
: It should be noted here that the Lubavitcher Rebbe (in Igros Kodesh
: Vol.18 #6507)actually answers the question of Kol Hagodol Meichaveiro
: Yitzro Godul, he says: when the person is born his Yetzer Horah is as
: big as his Yetzer Tov etc. but when the person achieves thru Sur Meira
: Veasei Tov he can come to the Dargo of no longer having a Yetzer Horah,
: like it says concerning Dovid Hamelech.

Li nir'eh this answer to your question is the only way you /could/
understand the ba'al haTanya. Otherwise tzaddikim would be born, not
made. (Medrashim about Moshe as an infant aside, since they're generally
considered problematic in this regard.)

: >AIUI, Adam haRishon did not have a Yetzer Hara until after he sinned
: >with Eitz HaDaas. And yet he sinned (obviously).

: Pray tell what is the difference if someone has something inside him
: telling him to sin or if his wife (or Nochosh) tells him to sin?

As the Rambam says: the former has to choose between tov and ra,
the latter between emes and sheqer. Both sides would have to present
themselves as tov, the question is which is sheqer. Also, every aveirah
would have to be be'oneis, beshogeig or an aveirah lishmah.

-mi

-- 
Micha Berger                     Time flies...
micha@aishdas.org                        ... but you're the pilot.
http://www.aishdas.org                           - R' Zelig Pliskin
Fax: (413) 403-9905          

The "Haftara" on Yom ha-Atzma'ut is read without any Berakhot - before
or after. Hence it presents no halakhic problem.

--
Dr. Aryeh A. Frimer
E-mail: FrimeA@mail.biu.ac.il

I checked in one sefer on k'rias haTorah, as well as the Kitzur shulchan
aruch that was mentioned. I have translated (some paraphrasing, footnotes
abbreviated) below, my conclusion for now is that there is no set din
in the Shulchan Aruch, and the achronim have two different opinions
(minhagim?) regarding the precedence of avoiding tirchah d'tzibura versus
avoiding implying p'gam to a sefer Torah. The KS"A seems to also value
reading from the sefer that was prepared, I'm not sure which way he
is leaning.

Sefer Zos haTorah - R' Shlomo Man ben R' Avraham
Chapter 5 Paragraphs 4-5

4. If one took out sefer Torah, and while still in the hand of the one
who will carry it to the bimah, the shamash remembers that the sefer is
not prepared for reading, and in the aron kodesh there is a sefer Torah
prepared, return it to the aron and take the prepared one.

Ftnote: quotes Yaavetz, zerah yaakov - there is no p'gam, don't roll it
in public

5. Some write that if one took out the sefer Torah not opened to the
order of the day, and when it is out of the aron they remembered, don't
return it to the aron, rather roll the one they took out and prepare to
read from it.

ftnote: sefer harav shemesh tzedokah, because of p'gam. Kaf hachayim
brings it


Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 78:10 at the end of the paragraph:
If they switched sifrei Torah, and took first the one prepared for later,
roll it up and take the second, to read from every sefer for [the reading
for which] it was prepared.

Any comments? I think I'm done for now unless someone saw a more specific
p'sak that one is more correct.

Thanks,
Avraham Cohen
mailto:jcohen@dclab.com
http://www.dclab.com

[I asked RSK for permission to forward this from Areivim to Avodah,
as it's an excercise worthwhile for all of us. And well belongs in our
archives. Unfortunately, I forgot the title he wanted on it, and so I
used the best I could recall of it.

[Please seriously consider the items in Simcha's list. And in particular
in the light intended: "One or two might be good for others to try also,
but not _instead_ of doing their own cheshbon hanephesh." Maybe more
than one or two... -mi]

I just received an e-mail OFF LIST which alerted me to the fact that my
previous posts WRT where we should be looking for the cause of the matzav
in EY sounded like I was pointing fingers either away from my self and/or
my social subset of Orthodoxy or at some particular one(s). I'd like to
clarify my points because that is _not_ what I meant to do at all.

My criticism is directed at myself as much as anyone else in that I
consider myself to be part of the 'fruhm world' about which I wrote in
my last two posts and count myself to be amongst those who need to do a
real cheshbon hanephesh to determine what we have done to contribute to
the matzav in EY and more importantly to determine what we can do to turn
things around. Personally, I have done _some_ thinking about what I can
do and have come up with a few ideas. One or two might be good for others
to try also, but not _instead_ of doing their own cheshbon hanephesh.

1) I will be more careful about saying Good Shabbos to _every_ Jew I
pass in the street, even if I am in the midst of a conversation with a
friend or a family member.

2) I will bli neder find one ma'aseh about someone else's gadol to tell
over at the Shabbos table every week.

3) I will look for praise I can relate to my children about the good
things people in other groups are doing for the community or for klal
yisroel in general.

4) I will put together a college of pictures of gedolim past and present
to hang in my home and make sure it represents many branches of the
Torah world.

5) I will expose my kids to the positive aspects of Satmar, YU, YI, AY,
etc by taking them to visit as many different kehilos as possible over
their summer vacations.

6) I will respond to any speech in any shul which directly or indirectly
knocks someone else's yiddishkeit by asking the Rov respectfully and
privately what lesson I should take home from his drasha. If he doesn't
have a clear answer, I'll respectfully ask that he use the limited amount
of time in which he has my attention to give me ideas about how I can
improve myself instead of ideas of how to feel better about what little
I am doing by showing me who is worse.

7) I will take my own advise and look for the source of klal yisroel's
problems in my mirror, not yours.

kt
sk

It is important, I believe, to learn Tehillim 83 in depth to know what the 
ikkar mechuvan of tefillos b'eis tzoro are to be.

Firstly, the tehilla begins with "Shir Mizmor" - a double language of song! 
This is not like 142: "Maskil" - that is, perhaps, a sober, intellectual 
kapitel. This is a joyous one! As RSRH says, albeit I am paraphrasing, 
bitachon is the key to yeshu'ah, and bitachon should generate simcha. A 
difficult concept to appreciate when the natural tendency is to be sad, but 
doubtless the one personified by Nachum Ish Gamzu and Rabbi Akiva.

In any event, it seems quite clear that we are davening over the Chillul 
Hashem inherent in our oppression and suffering. That the war of the 
non-Jew against the Jew is really a milchomo against HKB"H, and against Am 
Yisroel as Am Hashem. Thus, the ultimate resolution is not, ideally, the 
eradication of the enemy, but his (and others, of course) recognition of 
HKB"H's mastery and supremacy. Thus, we daven for Kiddush Shem Shomayim.

Perhaps these are devarim peshutim, and I apologize if they are, but 
chazara is always helpful!

[Email #2. -mi]

 From a friend:
>It seems to me, R Yosef, that the real war is internal.  The real Chilul
>Hashem, b'avonoseinu harabim, is ours, and our diminished state is our own
>failing rather than the aggression of our enemies - which is the mere
>instrumentality (from our perspective).  This is not to say that Amalek  has
>no external existence, but it deserves at least coequal mention in your
>analysis and perhaps should take priority.

[Email #3. -mi]

 From someone on my bcc list:
>>> Thus, we daven for Kiddush Shem Shomayim.

>Is that really true? Don't we daven because we are in pain, and we cry out to
>our Father to help us? Granted, those on higher levels, to whom the pain of
>the Shechina is more real, cry about that as well, but in its simplest (and
>I don't mean that in the pejorative) form, it is a cry for mercy to our
>loving Father. True, we are b'simcha, because we know who are Father is, and
>the powers that He possess, and the love that he holds for his Nation.

The immediate catalyst for a prayer may be just about anything. The
question is what words we are saying, and what the tefillos are conveying.
Indeed, as a great man recently noted to me, the main tehillim (such
as 130 and 131) we recite in times of distress are "Shir ha'Ma'alos" -
songs, that we might assume to be joyous songs, sung on the steps of the
Beis ha'Mikdosh. 'Twould seem that there must be some message conveyed
to the praying person by those words he is praying, no?

Kol Tuv,
YGB
ygb@aishdas.org      http://www.aishdas.org/rygb

*******************


[ Distributed to the Avodah mailing list, digested version.                   ]
[ To post: mail to avodah@aishdas.org                                         ]
[ For back issues: mail "get avodah-digest vXX.nYYY" to majordomo@aishdas.org ]
[ or, the archive can be found at http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/              ]
[ For general requests: mail the word "help" to majordomo@aishdas.org         ]