The Long and the Short; the Loud and
the Soft – Approaches to Prayer from the Torah of the Maharal, with
Elucidations from the Chofetz Chaim and Pachad Yitzchok
By Eliakim Willner
Eliakim Willner is author of “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv HaTorah: An
Appreciation of Torah Study”, a translation with commentary of a work by the
Maharal of Prague, published by Artscroll/Mesorah. This article is adapted from
his forthcoming continuation of the Nesivos Olam series, “Nesivos Olam – Nesiv
HaAvodah: The Philosophy and Practice of Prayer”.
Introduction
The Gemara (Brachos
31a) teaches:
“Rav Hamnuna said, ‘How many important
laws can be learned from these verses relating to Chana! “And Chana spoke in
her heart” – from this we learn that one
who prays must concentrate in his heart. “Only her lips moved” – from this we
learn that one who prays must form the words with his lips. “And her voice was
not heard” – from this we learn that it is forbidden to raise one’s voice when
engaged in prayer.’”
Volumes can be, and have been, written
about Tefillah; it is a massive subject that is well beyond the scope of
a single article. Here we examine some specific issues regarding audibility and
length of prayer, as explained by the Maharal, and as explicated by the Chofetz
Chaim, Rav Yitzchok Hutner in Pachad Yitzchok, and others.
Why Must Prayer be Spoken?
In Nesiv HaAvodah 2:2 the Maharal writes that
man’s uniqueness among the living creatures that inhabit the world is
identified with his power of speech. If a person does not verbalize his needs
in prayer he has not identified himself as an appropriate “address” to which
the prayer fulfillment may be sent. In order to qualify as a “recipient” he has
to articulate his desire to have his needs fulfilled. Thus a person must speak
out his desire to have his needs fulfilled. If he does so he is asking as a human
with a need and this makes him eligible to have his prayer responded to. Man
alone qualifies for the relationship of closeness to Hashem that can lead to
prayer fulfillment and man alone was elevated with the power of speech, so
articulating one’s prayer requests is the equivalent of presenting to Hashem
the “documentary evidence” that entitles him to have his prayer accepted.
Only as humans asking as humans, are we able to
have our needs fulfilled by the Creator – since, only then, are we humans
who are lacking. A person who prays mentally and without verbalizing has failed
to present his needs as a human. Even though Hashem certainly knows our
thoughts, if we fail to articulate our needs, we fail to qualify ourselves as a
valid recipients of Hashem’s response.
In Derech Chaim 2:13 the Maharal, in explaining
the Gemara that states that prayer must be in the form on an entreaty,
notes that not only the attitude of the prayer, but also its spoken wording,
must be in the form of an entreaty. He explains that speech turns a thought
into an action – the action of speaking – and that positioning oneself as
subservient to Hashem via acts is a much more powerful expression of
subservience than merely having those thoughts. And the Maharal explains in Nesiv
HaAvodah, prayer is speech-centric.
This is why we must express ourselves verbally when we
pray. Speaking identifies us as humans. A person who prays mentally and without
verbalizing has failed to present his needs as a human.
As a corollary to this rule, a person must articulate
his requests precisely, when he prays, and not be careless with his words on
the assumption that Hashem will understand what he wants even if he misspeaks.
In Gur Aryeh, Bamidbar 22:11, with respect to the wording of
Bil’am’s request of Hashem for permission to curse Yisroel, the Maharal writes,
“Do not think that Hashem will act on the basis of His knowledge of a person’s
intent when he makes a request. Rather, Hashem responds only on the basis of
what a person actually says”.
The Maharal makes a similar point in Nesiv HaTorah
chapter 4 about the need to verbalize the study of Torah. Speech, he writes, is
identified with life and the Torah is called the source and extender of life.
By verbalizing Torah study one connects life (the power of speech) with the
source of life (Torah). This allows the Torah’s life-giving power to take
effect. That connection does not take place when Torah study is confined to the
mind and not verbalized. For this reason, adds the Maharal, one does not make
the Torah study blessings if the study is not verbalized. See Shulchan
Aruch, Orach Chaim 47:4.
The Power of Speech and
the Power of Torah – The Potency of Spirituality (Chofetz Chaim)
In Nesiv HaLashon
chapter 5 the Maharal refers to the power of speech as that which gives man his
tzurah, his form – that is, it is man’s defining feature. Tzurah
is identified with ruchnius – with man’s intellect and spirituality.
Torah, of course, is also identified with ruchnius.
In that light, the Chofetz
Chaim, in Shmiras HaLoshon, Shaar HaZechira 1, citing a Yerushalmi
in Peah 1, writes that just as the reward for Torah learning is of equal
weight to the reward for all the other commandments combined, so is the
punishment for loshon horah, defamatory speech, of equal weight to the
punishment for all the other prohibitions combined. The positive commandment
of Torah learning and the negative
commandment of loshon horah are at opposite ends of the Torah’s
spectrum; Torah learning is at the height and loshon horah is at the
nadir.
The basis for the special
status of these commandments lies in their relative detachment from the
physical and their association with the spiritual. Torah study utilizes the
intellect. Loshon horah utilizes the power of speech. Both are more
spiritual than physical in nature and therefore both are far more potent in
terms of the affect that they have in the spiritual realm than the other
commandments, both positive and negative, since those all involve physical actions
of the body.
An analogy from the material
world: Of the four elements that comprise this world – fire, water, earth and
air – the two non-physical elements, fire and air, have far wider-reaching
consequences than the others and are capable of wreaking significantly greater
havoc than the others. Similarly, the two commandments that are most detached
from the physical body, loshon horah in the negative sense, and Torah
study in the positive sense, have the most significant spiritual consequences.
And since the spiritual consequences of the commandments directly affect the
physical world, as the Nefesh HaChaim details, these two commandments
have a major impact on the physical quality of our lives; on our security and
well-being.
All the commandments effect
the spiritual and physical realms, but Torah and loshon horah, because
of their spiritual nature, have the most dramatic effect. That is why the
reward for Torah study is so magnified that it outweighs that of all the other
commandments together. And it is why the punishment for loshon horah is
so magnified that it outweighs that of all the other negative commandments
together.
The Relationship of Thought
and Speech in Prayer
In Beraishis 48:22
Yaakov bequeaths the city of Schem to Yosef as a reward for Yosef’s undertaking
to return the body of Yaakov to the Meoras HaMachpela burial cave in
Israel for internment. He describes Schem as the city that he took from the
Emorites “with my sword and my bow”. Rashi explains that as a meaning
“with my wisdom and my prayer”. The efficacy of prayer is compared to that of
bow and arrow weaponry.
Rabbi Yehoshua Dovid
Hartman, in his commentary on the Maharal in Gur Aryeh on this verse, cites the
Maharal’s explanation of prayer in Beer Hagolah 4. There the Maharal
explains that the Hebrew word for prayer, tefilla, comes from the root pallal,
which means “thought”. Prayer at its core is a will; a desire, that takes form
as thought, that Hashem should fulfill the needs that he is praying for.
Without that crucial thought, the words of prayer are devoid of meaning and
cannot properly be called prayer at all.
In that light we can
understand, Rabbi Hartman, explains, the appropriateness of the bow and arrow
metaphor to prayer. A bow provides the force that propels the arrow. It is the
arrow that strikes the target but it is the force of the bow that creates the
effect of the strike. With respect to prayer, the thought, the will, like the
bow, provides the “force” that propels; in this case, it is the spoken words of
prayer that are being propelled. The analog to the “arrow” that carries the
force are the words of the prayer, that articulate and “carry” the thought/will
that constitute the core of the prayer itself.
Why is the force – the
thought – itself not sufficient? Why is a “carrier” needed in the form of the
spoken words of prayer? In the terminology of the Maharal here, the answer is
that since speech is man’s signature characteristic, and since man’s sole
entitlement to having his prayers responded to by Hashem is his status as man,
he needs to stamp his prayers with man’s exclusive imprimatur – that is, he
needs to “package” them in speech – in order to establish that he has a “right”
to having his prayers answered. The thought, like the bow, indeed supplies the
force. But without the “arrow” of the spoken word, the thought alone would be
as impotent as a bow without an arrow.
Not Too Loud!
Although one must verbalize
prayer, it is important that prayer not be too loud (as the Gemara with
which we began derives from the prayer of Chana).
Ideally, writes the Mishnah
Brurah in Orach Chaim 101:2, one should pray so quietly that even
the person standing next to him should not hear him. This is to avoid
disturbing the prayers of others.
But there is another, deeper
reason for keeping the volume down when praying. The Maharal in Nesiv
HaAvodah 2:3 quotes the Gemara in Brachos 24b.: “The braiso
taught, ‘One who prays so that it can be hear is among those of little faith.
One who raises his voice in prayer is counted among the false prophets.” The Gemara
explains that the prophets of the idol Baal screamed to him for a response so
one who prays loudly is compared to them.
The Maharal writes that such
prayer indicates “little faith” because prayer is an expression of faith that
Hashem will fulfill the supplicant’s requests, and this faith is indicative of
an attachment to an exalted and hidden plane. This faith goes back to the very
origins of the world when Hashem willed the world into existence from nothing.
He therefore controls every last detail of the world’s operation and it is in
His sole power to fulfill prayer requests. One who prays with the knowledge
that Hashem and only Hashem can help him thus attaches himself to this lofty
and primordial plane of existence. Loud prayer flies in the face of this kind
of prayer.
(We
should add that the Mishnah Brurah 95:2 writes that, aside from prayer
decibel level, it is inappropriate to make unusual movements or sounds of any
kind when praying publicly.)
When a Shorter Prayer is
Better (Pachad Yitzchok)
In Nesiv HaAvodah 6:7
the Maharal speaks of the benefits of a long prayer, as long as the
pronunciation of the words is not artificially elongated and the person praying
is not fixated on his expectation of a positive response. However, there are
occasions when a shorter, albeit complete prayer, is better.
With the Egyptians gaining
on them from behind and the Red Sea blocking their way in front, and with no
salvation in sight, Moshe cried out to Hashem in prayer, as the Torah relates
in Shmos 14:16. Rashi explains that Moshe intended to pray at
length but Hashem told him that when Yisroel is in distress, it is not the time
for extended prayer. Hashem said, “Why do you cry out to me? Speak to Yisroel
and have them travel”.
The Maharal in Gur Aryeh
on that verse writes that the reason a long prayer was not appropriate at that
juncture was that no prayer response could be forthcoming until the prayer
ended. The salvation would have to be deferred until the prayer was completed.
To avoid prolonging Yisroel’s distress, then, Hashem told Moshe to pray
briefly, so as to accelerate the salvation.
Why, though, was it
necessary to defer the salvation until the completion of the prayer? Why could
Hashem not have alleviated the distress of Yisroel even while Moshe continued
his prayer? To answer this question we turn to Rav Yitzchok Hutner’s Pachad
Yitzchok, Pesach Maamar 14. He cites the Medrash (Shmos Rabbah
21:5) which asks, why did Hashem wait until Yisroel was literally cornered
before delivering His salvation? The answer, says the Medrash, is that Hashem
yearned for their prayers and thus brought about a situation that compelled
prayer. In other words, Rav Hutner explains, although ordinarily a predicament
is cause for prayer, there are times when Hashem’s desire for prayer is cause
for a predicament.
On those occasions – and the
crisis at the Red Sea was one of those occasions – it is impossible for the
salvation to be delivered mid-prayer. That would defeat the purpose of the
predicament, which was to engender the very prayer that would be cut short by a
premature salvation. In such cases the prayer is not a means to an end, but is
the end itself, and preserving its integrity is paramount.
That is why Hashem told
Moshe to complete his prayer before delivering the salvation. When the prayer
was complete, the objective of the predicament – to engender the prayer – was
accomplished, and the salvation could be delivered without further delay.
But there is more, Rav
Hutner continues. Ordinarily, after being rescued from disaster, the prevailing
attitude is deep gratitude for the salvation. The salvation is the focus. After
the miraculous events at the Red Sea, however, Yisroel’s focus was not so much
on the salvation itself, as it was on the knowledge that their prayers had
found a ready ear, as it were, in Hashem. They gloried in this demonstration
that Hashem is attuned to their prayers. The rescue itself? That was but a
means, whose end was this great realization.
Just as, for Hashem, the
predicament was a means to extract Yisroel’s prayers, so for Yisroel, was the
rescue a means to an appreciation that Hashem is listening to those prayers. As
King Dovid expressed it, “I love when Hashem hears my voice in my
supplications. For He extended His ear to me…” (Tehillim 116:1-2).
When Even a Deficient
Prayer is Effective (Pachad Yitzchok)
Regarding our three daily
prayer services, the Gemara in Brachos 26b says:
“Rabbi Yosi son of Rabbi Chaninah said,
‘Our [three] forefathers established the [three] prayer services… There is a braiso
supporting Rabbi Chaninah’s position: ‘Avrohom instituted the Shachris morning
service, as is written, “And Avrohom
arose early in the morning to the place where he stood before Hashem” and ‘standing’ can only mean
prayer, as is written, ‘And Pinchas
stood and prayed, and the plague was stopped’.
‘Yitzchok instituted the Mincha afternoon
service as is written, “And Yitzchok
went out to meditate in the field
towards evening”, and meditate can only mean prayer, as is written, “A prayer
for a poor man when he enwraps himself and pours out his meditation before
Hashem”.’
‘Yaakov instituted the Maariv evening
service as is written, “And he
encountered the place and lodged there because the sun had set”, and encounter
can only mean prayer, as is written, “[And you, pray not on behalf of this
people,] lift up neither cry nor prayer, and do not encounter me”.
Let us shift our focus to
the events of kriyas yam suf. With the Egyptians gaining on them from
behind and the Red Sea blocking their way in front, and with no salvation in
sight, Yisroel cried out to Hashem in prayer, as the Torah relates in Shmos
14:10. Rashi explains that in so doing, Yisroel clung to the prayer
practices of their forefathers. He cites the verses brought in the Gemara
in Brachos 26b regarding the prayer services established by each of the
forefathers.
The Maharal in Gur Aryeh
explains that there was nothing particularly special or meritorious about their
prayer; indeed, at the same time they prayed, they complained, and expressed regret
on having left Egypt. Rather, they were simply following their forefathers’
prayer tradition. It was a half-hearted, rote effort.
Rav Yitzchok Hutner, in Pachad
Yitzchok, Purim Maamar 19:3, explains that it might be thought that Rashi
and the Maharal are implying that the deficiency in Yisroel’s prayer at the Red
Sea resulted in its inefficacy, but in reality they are describing a singular
feature of this prayer; a feature that made this prayer accomplish its intended
result notwithstanding its deficiency. Indeed, the result of the prayer was
that “Hashem will fight for you, but you will remain silent” (Shmos
14:14).
This prayer did not operate
as traditional prayers do, through intense focus, concentration and merit.
Rather this prayer was effective because it served as a credential – it
identified Yisroel as descendants of the forefathers. We can best understand
this concept through a metaphor. A person petitions the King for something and
while he is making his case the King cuts him off, telling him, “I do not need
to hear your appeal. I am going to grant your request not because of your
argument but because I recognize, in the manner of your speaking, your
pedigree”. Similarly, when Hashem told Yisroel, “… you will remain silent”, the
intent was not to dismiss their prayer, but rather to inform them that through
their prayer, He recognized their ancestry, and the merit of that ancestry made
prayer in the traditional sense unnecessary, and mooted the inherent deficiency
of the prayer.
Yisroel’s prayer at the Red
Sea operated on a different basis than traditional prayer. It identified
Yisroel as children of the forefathers, and that in itself was an entitlement
to salvation. This prayer was a path to deliverance that bypassed the need for
traditional prayer.
Conclusion
It is important to
articulate our prayers carefully, and, when we add personal entreaties to our
prayers, to choose our words carefully. Prayers connect us back to our
forefathers and they connect us to Hashem, who awaits them.
Prayers are potent weapons;
they have the potential to move worlds, and we must take care that we are
moving worlds in the right direction.
