שיעור ערב תשעה באב
ק׳׳ק קל נפש מסרתי
שעה לפני ט׳ אב תשפ’’ג
Pre-Tisha b'Av Learning
Kol Nefesh Masorti Synagogue, London
26 July 2023 / (an hour before) 09 Av 5783
Why have You forgotten us utterly, forsaken us for all time?
חֲמִשָּׁה דְבָרִים אֵרְעוּ אֶת אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בְּשִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר בְּתַמּוּז וַחֲמִשָּׁה בְּתִשְׁעָה בְאָב... בְּתִשְׁעָה בְאָב נִגְזַר עַל אֲבוֹתֵינוּ:
שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּנְסוּ לָאָרֶץ,
וְחָרַב הַבַּיִת בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבַשְּׁנִיָּה,
וְנִלְכְּדָה בֵיתָר,
וְנֶחְרְשָׁה הָעִיר.
מִשֶּׁנִּכְנַס אָב, מְמַעֲטִין בְּשִׂמְחָה:
Five events occurred to our forefathers on 17 Tammuz and five on 9 Av ... on 9 Av, it was decreed upon our ancestors that:
1. they would not enter Erets Yisrael
2. the First Temple was destroyed
3. the Second Temple was destroyed
4. (the city called) Beitar was captured and
5. the city (of Jerusalem) was ploughed.
From when (the month of) Av begins, we decrease in rejoicing.
חָרַב הַבַּיִת בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבַחֹדֶשׁ הַחֲמִישִׁי בְּשִׁבְעָה לַחֹדֶשׁ הִיא שְׁנַת תְּשַׁע עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה לַמֶּלֶךְ נְבֻכַדְנֶאצַּר מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל בָּא נְבוּזַרְאֲדָן רַב טַבָּחִים עֶבֶד מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל יְרוּשָׁלִָם וַיִּשְׂרֹף אֶת בֵּית ה׳ וְגוֹ׳״,
וּכְתִיב: ״וּבַחֹדֶשׁ הַחֲמִישִׁי בֶּעָשׂוֹר לַחֹדֶשׁ הִיא שְׁנַת תְּשַׁע עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה לַמֶּלֶךְ נְבוּכַדְנֶאצַּר מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל בָּא נְבוּזַרְאֲדָן רַב טַבָּחִים עָמַד לִפְנֵי מֶלֶךְ בָּבֶל בִּירוּשָׁלִָם וְגוֹ׳״.
וְתַנְיָא: אִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר בְּשִׁבְעָה, שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר ״בֶּעָשׂוֹר״. וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר בֶּעָשׂוֹר, שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר ״בְּשִׁבְעָה״, הָא כֵּיצַד?
בְּשִׁבְעָה נִכְנְסוּ נׇכְרִים לַהֵיכָל, וְאָכְלוּ וְקִלְקְלוּ בּוֹ שְׁבִיעִי שְׁמִינִי. וּתְשִׁיעִי סָמוּךְ לַחֲשֵׁיכָה הֵצִיתוּ בּוֹ אֶת הָאוּר, וְהָיָה דּוֹלֵק וְהוֹלֵךְ כׇּל הַיּוֹם כּוּלּוֹ...
וְהַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: אִלְמָלֵי הָיִיתִי בְּאוֹתוֹ הַדּוֹר לֹא קְבַעְתִּיו אֶלָּא בָּעֲשִׂירִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרוּבּוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל בּוֹ נִשְׂרַף.
וְרַבָּנַן — אַתְחַלְתָּא דְפוּרְעֲנוּתָא עֲדִיפָא.
(The Mishna taught that) The First Temple was destroyed (on 9 Av), as it is written (in II Kings 25:8-9): "And on the fifth month on the seventh day, this was the nineteenth year of the reign of King N'vuchadnetsar of Babylon, came N'vuzar'adan, the Chief of Army, servant of the Babylonian King, to Jerusalem. (He) burned down the House of Hashem etc.".
It is (also) written (in Jeremiah 52:12-13): "And on the fifth month on the tenth day, this was the nineteenth year of the reign of King N'vuchadnetsar of Babylon, came N'vuzar'adan, the Chief of Army, servant of the Babylonian King, who stood before the King of Babylonia, into Jerusalem etc.".
The Sages taught (in a peri-mishnaic source not recorded in the Mishna): It is not possible to state on the seventh, since it was already said on the tenth and it is impossible to state on the tenth, as it was already said on the seventh. How can this be?
(The Gemara explains that) On the seventh, the non-Jews entered into the Sanctuary and (they) ate and desecrated it on the seventh and on the eight. On the ninth, close to the sunset, they kindled in it fire, which was burning all day long...
Rabbi Yochanan used to say: "If I were in that generation, I would have only instituted (the commemorative fast) on the tenth, because the majority of the Sanctuary burned down on (the tenth)."
The (majority opinion of the) Rabbis (ruled that): "At/in the beginning of the tragedy is preferable (to observe the fast)".
הסיפור הראשון: שנאת חנם, או...
The First Tale : Baseless Hatred, or...
אֲבָל מִקְדָּשׁ שֵׁנִי שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹסְקִין בְּתוֹרָה וּבְמִצְוֹת וּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, מִפְּנֵי מָה חָרַב?
מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיְתָה בּוֹ שִׂנְאַת חִנָּם. לְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁשְּׁקוּלָה שִׂנְאַת חִנָּם כְּנֶגֶד שָׁלֹשׁ עֲבֵירוֹת: עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים.
However, (the people living in the period of) the Second Temple, (they) were engaged in Torah (study) and (the performance of) mitsvot and good deeds - why (then) was (the Second Temple) destroyed?
Because there was baseless hatred (during that period). (This comes) To teach you that baseless hatred is equivalent to three transgressions: to idol worship, illicit (sexual) relations and bloodshed.
בַּעֲוֹן שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ חָרֵב,...
By the sin of spilling of the blood (was) the Temple destroyed...
מַתְנִי׳ עוּבָּרָה שֶׁהֵרִיחָה — מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָהּ עַד שֶׁתָּשִׁיב נַפְשָׁהּ.
חוֹלֶה — מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּי בְּקִיאִין,
וְאִם אֵין שָׁם בְּקִיאִין — מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר דַּי.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: עוּבָּרָה שֶׁהֵרִיחָה בְּשַׂר קוֹדֶשׁ אוֹ בְּשַׂר חֲזִיר — תּוֹחֲבִין לָהּ כּוּשׁ בְּרוֹטֶב, וּמַנִּיחִין לָהּ עַל פִּיהָ,
אִם נִתְיַישְּׁבָה דַּעְתָּהּ — מוּטָב,
וְאִם לָאו — מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָהּ רוֹטֶב עַצְמוֹ,
וְאִם נִתְיַישְּׁבָה דַּעְתָּהּ — מוּטָב,
וְאִם לָאו — מַאֲכִילִין אוֹתָהּ שׁוּמָּן עַצְמוֹ, שֶׁאֵין לְךָ דָּבָר שֶׁעוֹמֵד בִּפְנֵי פִּקּוּחַ נֶפֶשׁ, חוּץ מֵעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְגִילּוּי עֲרָיוֹת וּשְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים.
Mishna:
A pregnant woman who smelled (food and was overcome by a desire to eat it) - we feed her until her soul is restored.
If she is ill - we feed her (a quantity) based on the advice of the experts,
but if there are no experts there - we feed her based on her own (judgement) until she says enough.
Gemara:
The Sages taught (in a peri-mishnaic source not recorded in the Mishna): A pregnant woman who smelled consecrated (meat) or a meat of a pig, (we) dip for her a reed in the juice and place that on her mouth.
If her senses return - good.
If not - we feed her the stew itself.
If her senses return - good.
If not - we feed her the fats (of the meat) itself, for there is not a thing that stands in the way of saving a life (פקוח נפש) except for idol worship, illicit (sexual) relations and bloodshed.
נָֽפְלָה֙ עֲטֶ֣רֶת רֹאשֵׁ֔נוּ אֽוֹי־נָ֥א לָ֖נוּ כִּ֥י חָטָֽאנוּ׃
The crown has fallen from our head; woe to us for we have sinned.
אמר ר' יוחנן: לא חרבה ירושלים אלא על שדנו בה דין תורה. אלא דיני דמגיזתא לדיינו? אלא, אימא: שהעמידו דיניהם על דין תורה ולא עבדו לפנים משורת הדין:
Rabbi Yochanan said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed due to them judging (cases on the basis of the) Torah law. (The Gemara asks:) Should they have had the arbitration practice of untrained magistrates? Rather, say: because they established their rulings (based) on the Torah law and they did not go beyond the strict interpretation of the law (or rules).
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁחִלְּלוּ בָּהּ אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת,...
אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁבִּיטְּלוּ קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע שַׁחֲרִית וְעַרְבִית,...
אָמַר רַב הַמְנוּנָא: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁבִּיטְּלוּ בָּהּ תִּינוֹקוֹת שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן,...
אָמַר עוּלָּא: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה לָהֶם בּוֹשֶׁת פָּנִים זֶה מִזֶּה,...
אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁהוּשְׁווּ קָטָן וְגָדוֹל,...
אָמַר רַב עַמְרָם בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא, אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁלֹּא הוֹכִיחוּ זֶה אֶת זֶה,...
אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁבִּיזּוּ בָּהּ תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים...
וְאָמַר רָבָא: לֹא חָרְבָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁפָּסְקוּ מִמֶּנָּה אַנְשֵׁי אֲמָנָה,...
Abaye said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) desecrated in her (it) Shabbat"...
Rabbi Avahu said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) neglected the recitation of the Sh'ma in the morning and in the evening (services/prayers)".
Rav Hamnuna said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) neglected (the religious education of) the children".
Ulla said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) had no shame before each other"...
Rabbi Yischak said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) equated the minor and the great (citizen)"...
Rav Amran the son of Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said (that) Rabbi Shimon bar Abba said (that) Rabbi Chanina said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) did not rebuke one another"...
Rabbi Yehuda said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because (they) disparaged the Torah scholars"...
And Rava said: "Jerusalem was only destroyed because ceased from (stopped being in) her (it) trustworthy people,...
הסיפור השני: קמצא בר קמצא
The Second Tale: Kamtsa and bar Kamtsa
אַקַּמְצָא וּבַר קַמְצָא חֲרוּב יְרוּשָׁלַיִם – דְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּרָחֲמֵיהּ קַמְצָא, וּבְעֵל דְּבָבֵיהּ בַּר קַמְצָא. עֲבַד סְעוֹדְתָּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְשַׁמָּעֵיהּ: זִיל אַיְיתִי לִי קַמְצָא. אֲזַל אַיְיתִי לֵיהּ בַּר קַמְצָא.
אֲתָא, אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ דַּהֲוָה יָתֵיב. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִכְּדֵי הָהוּא גַּבְרָא בְּעֵל דְּבָבֵאּ דְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא הוּא, מַאי בָּעֵית הָכָא? קוּם פּוֹק! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הוֹאִיל וַאֲתַאי, שִׁבְקַן וְיָהֵיבְנָא לָךְ דְּמֵי מָה דְּאָכֵילְנָא וְשָׁתֵינָא.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יָהֵיבְנָא לָךְ דְּמֵי פַּלְגָא דִּסְעוֹדְתָּיךְ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: יָהֵיבְנָא לָךְ דְּמֵי כּוּלַּהּ סְעוֹדְתָּיךְ! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא. נַקְטֵיהּ בִּידֵיהּ וְאוֹקְמֵיהּ וְאַפְּקֵיהּ.
Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtsa and bar Kamtsa. There was a certain man who had a friend called Kamtsa and an enemy called Bar Kamtsa. He held a feast and said to his servant: "Go and bring me Kamtsa". He (the servant) went and brought him Bar Kamtsa.
He (the host) came and found that he (Bar Kamtsa) was sitting (at his feast). He (the host) said to him (to Bar Kamtsa): "Now, this person (you) is an enemy of this person (Kamtsa)! What do you want here?! Get up and leave!". He (Bar Kamtsa) said to him (the host): "Since I (already) came, let me stay and I will give you the value of (money for) what I'll eat and drink".
He (the host) said to him (to Bar Kamtsa): "No!". He (Bar Kamtsa) said to him (the host): "I will give you the value of (money for) half of your feast". He (the host) said to him (to Bar Kamtsa): "No!". He (Bar Kamtsa) said to him (the host): "I will give you the value of (money for) your whole feast". He (the host) said to him (to Bar Kamtsa): "No!". (The host) Took (Bar Kamtsa) by his hand, stood him up and ejected him (from the feast).
- what is happening in Act I?
- is anyone in the wrong?
- how might Bar Kamtsa have been feeling during Act I?
- why would Bar Kamtsa have showed up at the feast?
- why might Bar Kamtsa have wanted to stay at the feast?
- who else might have been at the feast?
...אָמַר לוֹ אַל תְּבַיְּשֵׁנִי וַאֲנָא יָתֵיב וְלֵית אֲנָא אָכֵיל וְשָׁתֵי.
...וְהָיָה שָׁם רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה בֶּן אַבְקוּלָס וְהָיְתָה סֵפֶק בְּיָדוֹ לִמְחוֹת וְלֹא מִיחָה, מִיָּד נְפֵיק לֵיהּ,...
...he (Bar Kamtsa) said to him (the host): "Do not shame me and I will sit without drinking and eating"...
...Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas was there and had the capacity to protest, but he did not. Immediately (Bar Kamtsa) left...
אָמַר: הוֹאִיל וַהֲווֹ יָתְבִי רַבָּנַן וְלָא מַחוֹ בֵּיהּ, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ קָא נִיחָא לְהוּ, אֵיזִיל אֵיכוֹל בְּהוּ קוּרְצָא בֵּי מַלְכָּא. אֲזַל אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְקֵיסָר: מְרַדוּ בָּךְ יְהוּדָאֵי! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִי יֵימַר? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שַׁדַּר לְהוּ קוּרְבָּנָא, חָזֵית אִי מַקְרְבִין לֵיהּ.
אֲזַל שַׁדַּר בִּידֵיהּ עִגְלָא תִּלְתָּא. בַּהֲדֵי דְּקָאָתֵי שְׁדָא בֵּיהּ מוּמָא בְּנִיב שְׂפָתַיִם, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ בְּדוּקִּין שֶׁבָּעַיִן – דּוּכְתָּא דִּלְדִידַן הָוֵה מוּמָא, וּלְדִידְהוּ לָאו מוּמָא הוּא.
Said (Bar Kamtsa after being ejected from the feast): "Since the Sages were sitting (there at the feast) and did not object, learn from this that they were at peace (with what was happening). I will go and report them to the (Roman) Government. He (Bar Kamtsa) went and said to the Emperor: "The Jews are rebelling against you!". He (the Emperor) said to him: "Who says so?". He (Bar Kamtsa) said to him (to the Emperor): "Send them a sacrifice and see whether they'll offer it".
Went (the Emperor) and send with his hand (using Bar Kamtsa) a calf of three (years old). As they (Bar Kamtsa and the calf) were coming (back to Jerusalem), he (Bar Kamtsa) blemished the animal on the upper lip - (although) there are those who say that the blemish was on the eyelids, which to them (the Romans) are not (considered) defects (which would disqualify an animal from the Temple service).
- what is happening in Act II?
- what was the role of the Sages in Act I?
- why might Bar Kamtsa have wanted to cause a blemish to the calf this way?
- is anyone in the wrong?
- how might Bar Kamtsa have been feeling during Act II?
...הָלַךְ אֵצֶל הַשִּׁלְטוֹן אָמַר לוֹ אִילֵין קוּרְבָּנַיָּא דְּאַתְּ מְשַׁלַּח לִיהוּדָאֵי לְמִקְרְבִינְהוּ אִינוּן אָכְלִין לְהוֹן וּמְקָרְבִין אוֹחֳרָנִים בְּחִילוּפַיְיהוּ, נְזַף בֵּיהּ...
...קָם הוּא בְּלֵילְיָא וַעֲשָׂאָן כֻּלָּן בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין בַּסֵּתֶר...
...he (Bar Kamtsa) went to the (Roman) Ruler and said to him: "those sacrifices that you send to the Jews, they offer different (animal) and eat (the one you send to sacrifice)...
...he (Bar Kamtsa) arose at night and cause (to) all (of the animals) blemishes in secret...
סְבוּר רַבָּנַן לְקָרוֹבֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם שְׁלוֹם מַלְכוּת. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה בֶּן אַבְקוּלָס: יֹאמְרוּ בַּעֲלֵי מוּמִין קְרֵיבִין לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ!
סְבוּר לְמִיקְטְלֵיהּ דְּלָא לֵיזִיל וְלֵימָא. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה: יֹאמְרוּ מֵטִיל מוּם בַּקֳּדָשִׁים יֵהָרֵג!
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: עִנְוְותָנוּתוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה בֶּן אַבְקוּלָס, הֶחְרִיבָה אֶת בֵּיתֵנוּ, וְשָׂרְפָה אֶת הֵיכָלֵנוּ, וְהִגְלִיתָנוּ מֵאַרְצֵנוּ.
The Sages thought to offer (the calf) because (they wanted to maintain) peace with the Government. Said to them Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas: "(people) will say (that) we offer blemished animals on the Altar!".
The Sages thought to kill him (Bar Kamtsa), as not to go (back to the Emperor and) speak (to him about the matter). Said to them Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas: "(people) will say (that) we will kill anyone who brings a blemished animal for sacrifice!".
Rabbi Yochanan said: "The humility of Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas destroyed our House (the Temple), burned our Sancutary (within the Temple) and caused us to be exiled from our land.
- what happened in Act III?
- is anyone in the wrong?
- what was the role of Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas in Act III?
- how might Bar Kamtsa have been feeling during Act III?
- what may have been the motivations inspiring the thinking of the Sages in Act III?
- is Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas a hero or a villain?
...כֵּיוָן שֶׁרָאָה אוֹתָן הַכֹּהֵן הִקְרִיב אוֹחֳרָנִין תַּחְתֵּיהוֹן...
...מִיָּד סְלִיק לְמַקְדְּשָׁה וְהֶחֱרִיבוֹ...
...הֲדָא דִּבְרִיָּאתָא אָמְרִין בֵּין קַמְצָא וּבֵין בֶּן קַמְצָא חֲרַב מַקְדְּשָׁא. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי עִנְוְתָנוּתוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי זְכַרְיָה בֶּן אַבְקוּלָס שָׂרְפָה אֶת הַהֵיכָל.
...when the Priest saw the animal, the offered another (animal) instead.
...immediately, (the Ruler) entered the Temple and destroyed it.
One saying that (people) say: "(the differences) between Kamtsa and Ben Kamtsa destroyed the Temple". Rabbi Yosei said: "the humility of Rabbi Zechariya ben Avkulas burned the Sanctuary".
כִּ֚י אִם־מָאֹ֣ס מְאַסְתָּ֔נוּ קָצַ֥פְתָּ עָלֵ֖ינוּ עַד־מְאֹֽד׃
For indeed you (haShem) have utterly rejected us, having been extremely incensed at us.
Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai was Aba Sikara's uncle and he managed to co-opt his nephew into helping him escape from the sieged city. After the successful smuggling of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai out of Jerusalem, he met with Vespasian and after a bit of back and forth, Vespasian received the news that he is summoned back to Rome to become the new leader of the Roman Empire. As this happened during the conversation with Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai, Vespasian agreed to fulfil Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai a wish. This moment is recounted in the Gemara as follows:
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מֵיזָל אָזֵילְנָא, וְאִינָשׁ אַחֲרִינָא מְשַׁדַּרְנָא; אֶלָּא בָּעֵי מִינַּאי מִידֵּי דְּאֶתֵּן לָךְ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תֵּן לִי יַבְנֶה וַחֲכָמֶיהָ,...
אִיבְּעִי לְמֵימַר לֵיהּ: לִשְׁבְּקִינְהוּ הָדָא זִימְנָא. וְהוּא סָבַר: דִּלְמָא כּוּלֵּי הַאי לָא עָבֵיד, וְהַצָּלָה פּוּרְתָּא נָמֵי לָא הָוֵי.
(Vespasian) Said to him (to Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai): "I will be going (back to Rome) and I will send another man (Titus), however, ask from me anything and I will give (it) to you (as a reward for our dialogue). He (Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai) said to him (to Vespasian): "Grant me Yavneh and her Sages (and Rabban Gamliel and one other slightly less relevant wish)...
...(the critical editor jumps in and suggest that) he (Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai) should have said to him (to Vespasian): "leave (the Jews and Jerusalem) this time (on this occasion - retreat), but he (Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai) thought perhaps (Vespasian) would not do so much and even the little salvation (of Yavne) he would not have received.
- what do we make of the request of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai?
- were there differences between Rabban Yochanan ben Zakai and the other rabbis?
- if so, what were the key differences between the choices they made?
הגה:...מתפללים בנחת ודרך בכי כאבלים וכן עושים בקריאת איכה (הגהות מיימוני) ובכל איכה מגביה קולו יותר (מהרי"ל) וכשמגיע החזן לפסוק השיבנו אומרים אותו הקהל בקול רם ואח"כ מסיים החזן וחוזר הקהל ואומר השיבנו בקול רם וכן החזן (הגהות מיימוני):
RAMA: ...(on the evening of Tisha b'Av) we daven peacefully in in a manner of weeping as the mourners would (according to Hagahot Maimoniyot), and so we act with the reading of Eicha (according to the Maharil). And when the Reader reaches the verse Hashiveinu, the congregation says it with a loud voice and thereafter the Reader concludes (the last verse), but the congregation goes back and says (the verse) Hashiveinu (again) in a loud voice and the Reader then also acts thusly (according to Hagahot Maimoniyot).
הֲשִׁיבֵ֨נוּ ה' ׀ אֵלֶ֙יךָ֙ (ונשוב) [וְֽנָשׁ֔וּבָה] חַדֵּ֥שׁ יָמֵ֖ינוּ כְּקֶֽדֶם׃
Take us back, haShem, to You, and let us come back; renew our days as before.
I like the parallel between the redemption arc of Aba Sikra in our Gemara and the approach we choose to the chanting of Megillat Eicha. Aba Sikra was seen as a negative character whose actions had an adverse effect on the Jerusalem siege. Megillat Eicha also describes Jerusalem at its ultimate low. However, Aba Sikra is approached by his uncle and given a chance to help and improve the situation. He alone could not have done much, because the movement he was in charge of would have toppled him. However, even, after realising the destructive impact of his staunchly-held beliefs, he decided to focus on the one good thing he could do to try and make the situation better.
So also with the depressive conclusion of Eicha, we go back a pasuk and focus on something positive. We have not been abandoned.
The story of Kamtsa and Bar Kamtsa demonstrates the detrimental consequences of a silent majority. We have seen Bar Kamtsa ejected from a feast attended by many, with not one person rising up to his defence. We also saw the rabbis refusing to offer a sub-standard sacrifice, which could have spoiled Bar Kamtsa's plot. These were the moments in our story where bravery, or a display of a moral character, were required, but absent.
The consequences of these inactions were catastrophic. The unwillingness to act and the fear of not performing to the highest standard we have seen in the Gemara are in stark contrast to our reading of Megillat Eicha. Although the text is graphic and difficult, we neither shy away from it nor do we let it dictate our destiny. We take ownership of the narrative and grapple with it, only to conclude that not all hope is lost.
For everyone who is going to be fasting over the next 25+ hours, I hope that this story provides a chance to reflect on the times we felt paralysed, refrained from action and unable to do the right thing. May we carry the message of hope into the future.
Tsom kal!