NOTE: BETWEEN DECEMBER 2013 AND JANUARY 2019 NEW POSTS OF SERIOUS DIVREI TORAH WERE POSTED ONLY AT Beis Vaad L'Chachamim, beisvaad.blogspot.com AS OF JANUARY 2019 I PLAN TO POST IN BOTH PLACES


For private communication, write to eliezere at aol

Friday, April 05, 2019

Tzav: The Minchas Chavitin

I posted in Shemini on the Rishonim that say that a Kohen Hedyot on the day of his investiture, when he brings his Minchas Chavitin which is called a Minchas Chinuch, has certain denim of a Kohen Gadol. This is based on the fact that the korban brought on by a young kohen on his first day is brought by the Kohen Gadol every day he is in office.  This is the shakla v'tarya Rabbi Avraham Bukspan (Miami, author of Classics and Beyond/אבני קודש/Parsha Pearls) and I had mei'inyan le'inyan.

From Rabbi Bukspan:
Tzav 2 — Kohanim and Korbanos and Klal Yisrael

זה קרבן אהרן ובניו אשר יקריבו לה' ביום המשח אתו עשירת האפה סלת מנחה תמיד מחציתה בבקר ומחציתה בערב:
הכהן המשיח תחתיו מבניו יעשה אתה חק עולם לה' כליל תקטר…
This is the offering of Aharon and his sons, which each shall offer to Hashem on the day he is inaugurated: a tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a meal-offering; continually, half of it in the morning and half of it in the afternoon…The Kohen from among his sons who is anointed in his place shall perform it; it is an eternal decree for Hashem; it shall be caused to go up in smoke in its entirety (Vayikra 6:13, 15).
            Often, a topic's location in the Torah speaks volumes, clueing us into wonderful lessons to learn and live life by. The placement of the korbanos the Kohanim brought upon being initiated into their holy service is such an instance. 
            Though the final third of Parashas Tzav describes the seven days of the inauguration of the Mishkan and the Kohanim, the minchas chinuch, the flour-offering brought by a Kohen on his first day of service, is found earlier in the parashah (between the korban minchah and korban chatas). If this is an inaugural sacrifice, why is it not placed near the laws that apply to the inauguration of the Kohanim?
             In general, a man of means would be the one to offer a large animal as a sacrifice, since that comes at a considerable expense. One with less disposable income would bring a less expensive bird, and one in the most dire straits would bring a minchah, a small amount of flour, scraped together from the free-for-the-taking leket, shichechah, andpe'ah.  
            Rav Zalman Sorotzkin (Oznayim LaTorah ad loc.) describes how feelings of worthlessness may shroud the pauper as he self-consciously, and with great embarrassment, brings what he perceives is the least of the korbanos. In Rav Sorotzkin's words, the poor person says to himself, "Everyone else brings animals and birds, while I, the poor man, have nothing with which to honor Hashem but a tenth of an ephah of flour!"
            For this reason, writes Rav Sorotzkin, right after the poor man's meal-offering, we find the meal-offering brought by the Kohen at his investiture into office. Hashem is showing the pauper who else is bringing a meal-offering: the Kohen, from the elite of Klal Yisrael. As Rashi explains (verse 13), though this korban was brought by all Kohanim only on the day of their inauguration, the Kohen Gadol brought it every day. In fact, he even brought it on Yom Kippur. Hashem was telling the pauper, "Even Aharon, on the day he enters the Kodesh HaKodashim, is to offer the same. What's more, the Kohen Gadol brings half of the measurement (of a tenth of an ephah) in the morning, and the other half at night, not even all at once — while yours is whole, offered all at one time. You have nothing to feel bad about."
            We can turn around the idea of the Oznayim LaTorah to demonstrate how it is also for the sake of the Kohen that he and the pauper bring the same korban. After undergoing a chinuch process and then waiting seven days (Vayikra 8), Aharon and his sons officially became Kohanim. From that point on, they were Klal Yisrael's elite. They were supported by the Klal, and had access to places that would render others guilty of a high crime. Bnei Yisrael needed their services and came to them with their problems. They were the holders of high office, with unique power and prestige. There is even a mitzvah to treat them with special honor (Vayikra 21:8).
            All of this could subtly induce feelings of superiority and unjustified importance. To preempt this, the Kohen, at the moment of his advancement, had to learn the lesson that only a minchas chinuch could teach. By bringing a poor man’s korban, he was making a statement: "I realize that I was not selected to lord over others but to serve, not to receive rewards but to help make life rewarding to others." At the very moment that he was elevated to high office, he had to be made aware that he should not feel elevated.
            The challenge facing the Kohen Gadol was far more serious, as he was the principal figure in the Beis HaMikdash. In contrast to the Kohen Hedyot, who served in theBeis HaMikdash for only two weeks a year, the Kohen Gadol served there all year long. And on Yom Kippur, he performed the special avodah of the day, even entering the Kodesh HaKodashim, the holiest place on earth. The other Kohanim, whom we have to honor, must themselves honor the Kohen Gadol. To thread the needle between accolades and humility could not have been easy for him.
             A Jewish king had to have a personal copy of the Torah strapped to his arms at all times:  "Le’vilti rum levavo mei’echav — So that his heart does not become haughty over his brothers” (Devarim 17:20).He may have been king, but he could not allow it to go to his head.  In order to uphold his moral and ethical compass, a Kohen Gadol also needed a tangible reminder.
            Yet one minchas chinuch, at the beginning of his career, would not have been sufficient. On a daily basis, the Kohen Gadol was to bring the same korban as the pauper did, to demonstrate that he may have merited high office, but he should not feel any higher than the people.  Like his forebear Aharon, who was praised for not allowing the office to change him (Bamidbar 8:3: Rashi, Ohr HaChaim), the Kohen Gadol had to maintain his spiritual equilibrium. As the Abarbanel (verse 13) explains, the Kohen Gadol had to offer a minchah every day, thereby bringing the feeling of humility into his heart, since after all, his offering was the same as the poor person's.
            Perhaps that is why he had to bring only half of the korban every morning and the other half every evening, taking the same tenth of an ephah as the most destitute person and dividing it into two. He thereby acknowledged that though he was the representative of the entire nation, he was not even giving as much as the poorest person at any one time.
            Rav Michel Zilber (cited in VeShalal Lo Yechsar ad loc.) has a far different pshat to explain why the Kohen Gadol brought what was essentially an inaugural korban every day.
As we saw in Rashi's explanation cited in the beginning of this piece, the pasuk weaves together the laws of the one-time minchas chinuch of the Kohen Hedyot with the dailyminchas chavitin of the Kohen Gadol. Why is this?
            Rav Zilber explains that even the daily korban of the Kohen Gadol was, to a certain extent, an inaugural one. The Kohen Gadol was supposed to be in a constant state of spiritual growth, with no ceiling or limits. As such, every day he was like a new person, different and greater than the day before. Consequently, his avodah on any given day was also new, filled with novel facets in his service to Hashem and the Klal. That is why he brought a daily meal-offering, which was essentially no different from a minchas chinuch, as he underwent a new inauguration on a daily basis.
            Rav Zilber concludes that this can serve as a lesson for us all. We need to constantly find new ways to grow and serve Hashem. The depth of our mitzvos and the care we put into them can always be improved and brought to the next level, as we constantly offer Hashem our personal minchah chadashah.


My response:

If I were to say it, I would use a slightly different approach, based on an idea I heard from Reb Moshe innumerable times. Davka the Kohen Gadol, who has reason to think that he stands on the highest plateau, needs to be reminded that as far as what he might achieve, he is no farther along than a kohen hedyot on the first day he is doing the avoda.

So there are two lessons. One, that a kohen hedyot should realize that he must seize the new opportunity and that he has the ability to be as great as the Kohen Gadol, and Two, the great Kohen Gadol has to be reminded never to rest on his laurels, that he has great horizons that remain to be achieved.

The Hedyot needs to know that he has the potential to be a Gadol. The Gadol needs to be reminded that he is just a Hedyot.

(Or, if you apply it to a Bar Mitzvah, 
The Bar Mitzva bachur needs to know that he now has the opportunity to become the greatest man in Klal Yisrael, and the greatest person in Klal Yisrael must be reminded to have the humility and receptiveness of a Bar Mitzva bachur.)

This reminds me of a Rashi in Melachim I 5:13 that I just learned with my wife the other day, which also relates to this week's parsha, Tazria. Speaking of the wisdom of Shlomo HaMelech, the passuk says
וַיְדַבֵּר֮ עַל־הָֽעֵצִים֒ מִן־הָאֶ֙רֶז֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּלְּבָנ֔וֹן וְעַד֙ הָאֵז֔וֹב אֲשֶׁ֥ר יֹצֵ֖א בַּקִּ֑יר וַיְדַבֵּר֙ עַל־הַבְּהֵמָ֣ה וְעַל־הָע֔וֹף וְעַל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ וְעַל־הַדָּגִֽים׃
Rashi says
וַיְדַבֵּר עַל הָעֵצִים. מָה רְפוּאַת כָּל אֶחָד, וְעֵץ פְּלוֹנִי יָפֶה לְבִנְיָן פְּלוֹנִי, וְלִטַּע בְּקַרְקַע פְּלוֹנִית וְכֵן עַל הַבְּהֵמָה, מָה רְפוּאָתָהּ, וְעִקַּר גִּדּוּלֶיהָ וּמַאֲכָלָהּ. וּמִדְרַשׁ אַגָּדָה: מָה רָאָה מְצֹרָע לִטָּהֵר בְּגָבוֹהַּ שֶׁבַּגְּבוֹהִים, וּבְנָמוּךְ שֶׁבַּנְּמוּכִים. וְעַל הַבְּהֵמָה וְעַל הָעוֹף, מָה רָאָה זֶה לִהְיוֹת כָּשֵׁר בִּשְׁחִיטָה בְּסִימָן אֶחָד, וְזֶה בִּשְׁנֵי סִימָנִין, וְדָגִים וַחֲגָבִים בְּלֹא כְלוּם.

The classic drush about needing to be reminded of gavhus and of nemichus, עפר ואפר ובשבילי נברא העולם. Like the Chovos Halevavos in שער הכניעה פרק ב

Monday, April 01, 2019

Shemini. The Cohen Upon His Initiation

I saw the following in a Parsha publication "Likutei Peshatim," produced by the Hebrew Theological College in Skokie, Illinois, under the direction of an adam chashuv me'od, Rabbi Ben-Zion Rand. After sharing what he says, I expand on it a little bit.


*************************************************** 
THE DAY OF INITIATION 
ויקרא משה אל מישאל ואל אלצפן בני עזיאל דד אהרן ויאמר אלהם קרבו שאו את אחיכם מאת פני הקדש אל מחוץ למחנה
Moses called Mishael and Elzaphan, sons of Uzziel the uncle of Aaron, and said to them, “Come forward and carry your kinsmen away from the front of the sanctuary to a place outside the camp.” Vayikra 10:4
"From here we learn that Kohanim may not become defiled by contact with dead bodies, for Elazar and Isamar were there and were not called upon to carry away the bodies of their brothers." -- Toras Kohanim 
The Midrash is amazing. What need is there to present a roundabout proof that Kohanim may not become contaminated by contact with a corpse, when it is explicitly stated at the beginning of Parashas Emor? Furthermore, why indeed did Elazar and Isamar not remove the corpses of their brothers, since the Torah (Vayikra 21:2-3) explicitly states that one’s father, mother, never married sister, brother, son and daughter are excluded from the general prohibition of contact with corpses. 

The Da’as Zekeinim teaches us that both these questions can be answered by assuming that the meaning of the Midrash is that on the day of an ordinary Kohen’s inauguration, he will assume the status of the Kohen Gadol. In fact, the Mincha offering of a Kohen Gadol every day is the same korban as that of the standard Kohen on the day of his inauguration. For this reason, just as a Kohen Gadol may not attend to the body for the funeral of even his closest relatives, so, too, may a כהן הדיוט (a plain Kohen) not attend to the body of his close relatives on his inaugural day, and the laws regarding the grooming of a Kohen Gadol apply to him as well. 
**********************************************************

Here is the Daas Zkeinim (and he says that the Bechor Shor says the same idea. It is not in our editions of the Bechor Shor, but it's brought by several Rishonim, such as Reb Chaim Paltiel and the Paaneiach Raza.)
ויקרא משה אל מישאל. אתמר בת"כ מכאן שאין הכהנים מטמאין למתים שהרי אלעזר ואיתמר  לא נטמאו להם.
ותימה שהרי במקום אחר מצינו בפי' שהכהנים מוזהרין על טומאת מת דכתיב לנפש לא יטמא בעמיו. ועוד אלעזר ואיתמר כהנים הדיוטי' היו ולמה לא נטמאו לאחיהם? וי"ל דהא דקאמר מכאן שהכהני' אין מטמאין למתים היינו כהני' הדיוטים ביום משחתם שאין מטמאין לקרובים שיש להם דין כהני' גדולי'. וכן פי' הרב בכור שור גבי ראשיכם אל תפרעו דאע"ג דכהנים הדיוטי' לא הוזהרו על פריעה ופרימה דמטמאין הן לקרוביהן ביום משחתם הרי הן ככהנים גדולים. ונ"ל דהיינו האי דקאמר בסיפיה דקרא כי שמן משחת קדש עליהם:

The idea that the Kohen brings a Minchas Chavitin on the day of his inauguration, his Chinuch, clearly teaches that on that day, an unlimited future opens up, and he can accomplish anything, he can reach for the stars.  I've said this many times, but I never thought to relate it to the fact that Elozor and Isomor were not allowed to carry Nodov and Avihu's bodies. If we are to take his idea at face value, it has tremendous halachic application - that every Hedyot, on his day of Minuy, is assur to become tamei to his seven kerovim. Indeed, it seems from the Bechor Shor and the Raavad on the Toras Kohanim here (1:25-6) that they do hold like that. 

(Rav Zevin extrapolated from here to explain why they didn't use oil that was tamei for the  the Menora after the Nes of the Chashmona'im. Just as here on the day of Chinuch tuma was assur without exception, so, too, when they were mechaneich the replacement Menorah you don't say hutra be'tzibbur. Rav Tzvi Pesach Frank disagrees. I discussed this here.)

So here's a question. Given that this special status of the Yom Hachinuch gives a Kohen dinim of the Kohen Gadol, what if, on Yom Kippur, both the Kohen Gadol and the Sgan became unfit to do the avodah. Could you just call in a new Kohen, have him do his Minchas Chinuch, and continue Avodas Yom Hakippurim?

Of course, the answer is no. But why? According to these Rishonim, a Kohen Hedyot on his day of Chinuch has the dinim of a Kohen Gadol!

The answer is, of course, that there are two dinim in "Kehuna Gedola." One is the kedusha of the Kohen Gadol, which might apply to a hedyot on his day of Chinuch. But the other is the minui, the fact that he is "Gadol mei'echav," that he was appointed to be the head of the Kohanim. The proof of the difference is that even according to these Rishonim, the Hedyot on his day of Chinuch serves in arab begadim. For Yom Kippur, you need Kehuna Gedola in the sense of being the head of the Kohanim.  

Friday, March 15, 2019

Vayikra. Korbanos and Fiscal Probity; Aveilus and Shalach Manos; Aveilus and Davening for the Amud.

This is the Kollel Horaah of America's Parsha Sheet. Each of the three sections is insightful and informative, and I found it particularly interesting this week.  


Gaining a Closer Relationship with Hashem
R' Moshe Orgel
The תורה in this weeks פרשה writes a one פסוק introduction prior to detailing the specifics of the korbanos, “אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן וכו” The גמ׳ derives many הלכות from this פסוק. One of them is derived from the word כי יקריב מכם קרבן אדם. Rashi explains that we learn that someone bringing a קרבן must do so from his own animals and money and not from stealing someone else’s, just like אדם הראשון did not possess any stolen objects – as he had no one to steal from; so too one's קרבן may not be from stolen property.

There are many other מצות which have the same exclusion – not to come from stolen property, for example; the תורה says that a לולב must be לכם from your property, not of someone else’s. קרבנות is the only place where the תורה alludes to this using the word אדם . What is unique about the פרשה of קרבנות that requires a different more complicated לימוד as opposed to the תורה simply writing לכם or something of that sort? 

The word קרבן denotes קורבה, closeness. The purpose of bringing a קרבן is to gain a closer relationship with Hashem and strive higher in רוחניות. The תורה is teaching us that in regard to this מצוה it is not merely enough to do the mitzvah with your own money, but rather you should be like אדם הראשון. He did not have one penny that was not his, nor could he covet someone else’s property as there was no one else in the world but him. Theft by him was an impossibility, not simply a choice. When someone steals, he is not only doing the actual sin, he is in addition demonstrating his lack of אמונה ובטחון. If he truly knows that Hashem will provide with all he needs and that it is predestined each year what he will attain that year, he wouldn’t be stealing as there would be no point he is only getting a certain amount of money anyway. A person needs to recognize that just as is was impossible for אדם הראשון to steal, so too it is impossible for one to achieve anything through theft.

With this idea in mind it is easy to understand what is unique about קרבנות that requires the law of stealing to come from the word אדם. The word אדם is not just teaching us a single focused law, rather an idea of how someone should conduct themselves. While attempting to come closer to Hashem through קרבנות or through תפילה one must make sure that the rest of one’s actions and thoughts are also up to par. Working on אמונה ובטחון to a level where one recognizes that all is from Hashem and one’s actions can’t change that is an integral aspect of the עבודה of the קרבנות. May we all be זוכה to become closer to Hashem, both through תפילה as well as אמונה ובטחון.
Editor's remark:
1. Chazal learn from the words Adam ki yakriv that just as Adam Harishon brought korbanos that were 100% his, with no admixture of theft, our korbanos must be equally pure. Rabbi Orgel sees this as a far broader lesson - if you want to bring a korban, YOU have to be like Adam. If you possess any stolen property, your korban is undesireable. I would put it this way: By Korban Pesach, if you own Chametz at the time of the hakrava, the korban is improper (you're over a lahv, but the Korban is kasher - Rambam Pesach 1:5.) Just as it is assur to bring a Korban Pesach when you own Chametz, so too it is assur to bring any Korban if you possess property that was acquired dishonestly.  It's not a lahv, and it doesn't passel the korban, but it's meguneh, and if you're looking for Ritzui, that's not where to look. 
It might be interesting to think about whether this applies to Shemoneh Esrei.


אורח חיים
Rabbi Shmuel Goldstein

Question: Can an Avel give and be given Mishloach Manos?

Answer: The Gemara says that an Avel during Shivah, (the first seven days, counting from the funeral), may not say Shalom Aleichem to others [a]. One may not say Shalom Aleichem to an Avel throughout Shloshim, (the first thirty days counting from the funeral), and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [b].

There are different opinions with regard to greeting someone with saying Shalom Aleichem on Shabbos [c]. It is permitted to give a Bracha to an Avel, and therefore one can say “good Shabbos” [d]. Saying “good morning” is also technically permitted. Some refrain from doing so, especially during Shivah [e].

The Ramah says that many people say Shalom after thirty days, during the twelve months of Avielus for a parent, but he says that he doesn’t know what they rely on, unless our greeting isn’t like the one in the time of Chazal [f]. Most Acharonim do not give credence to this leniency [g]. However it seems the Ramah may have been referring to statements like “good morning” [h].

The Maharil says that giving someone a present is the same as saying Shalom Aleichem, and therefore one may not give Mishloach Manos to an Avel. This would apply to giving an Avel throughout Shloshim, and for the twelve months if the Avel is in Aveilus for a parent [i]. Although an Avel during Shivah may not give presents, since Mishloach Manos is an obligation, they may and must give [j]. Some Acharonim say an Avel should only give Mishloach Manos to one or two people [k]. Either way an Avel should not give extra happy things in the Mishloach Manos [l]. Those who are lenient, and give an Avel, are relying on those who opine that Purim is like Shabbos regarding Aveilus combined with relying on those who opine that Shalom Aleichem is permitted on Shabbos [m].
If an Avel is after the third day of Aveilus, and they were given Mishloach Manos, they may accept it [n].

It is permitted to give Mishloach Manos to a Rebbe or someone whom the gift is almost like part of a salary [o].

Editor's remark:
This halacha of Mishloach Manos and Aveilus is not widely known, nor is the proscription from greeting an aveil with Shalom Aleichem during the entire year. As Rabbi Goldstein quoted from the Maharil, these two laws are the same - giving Shalach Manos is like greeting with Shalom Aleichem. It's also worth remembering that this applies during Kiddush Levana.


יורה דעה
R' Mechi Plittman
Question: When should an Avel serve as the Shatz? Are there any times when he should not act as שליח ציבור?

Answer: The רמ''א writes that the minhag has become that an avel does not daven for the amud on שבת ויו”ט [a]. The ש''ך explains that the same applies to the ימים נוראים [b]. The נודה ביהודה understands that to mean only ראש השנה ויום כפור and not ימי סליחות ועשרת ימי תשובה [c], during which the אבל can indeed lead the ציבור. The reason for this minhag is that it is inapropiate for one in mourning to lead the congregation when the congregation is in a state of שמחה [d]. It is important to note that his is a minhag and not an איסור [e]. This applies, both, to a son during the twelve months after losing a parent, and to any mourner for the duration of שלושים of a close relative [f].

Many אחרונים ask [g]; the רמ''א himself writes his sefer דרכי משה, that an אבל refrains from serving as שליח ציבור on ראש חודש as well. Furthermore, the source for רמ''א is the מהרי"ל who implies that this halacha applies to any day that we say הלל. That would include חנוכה ופורים [h]. So why then, does the רמ''א only mention שבת ויו''ט in the שלחן ערוך.

The ערוך השלחן answers that the רמ''א only listed the days on which an אבל does not daven for the amud the entire day i.e. שבת ויו"ט. On ראש חודש or חנוכה ופורים just refrain from davening in the morning, but he may daven for the עמוד for מנחה ומעריב [i]. This is the opinion of the משנה ברורה [j] as well. There are some who understand this minhag to allow the אבל to daven שחרית as well and just not daven הלל ומוסף [k].

On חול המועד there is a dispute if an אבל should daven for the amud at all. Some maintain that he should refrain from serving as ש''ץ for it is similar to a יו”ט [l].

However, many אחרונים are of the opinion that on any day we say הלל an אבל should not daven for the amud even מנחה ומעריב. This was the opinion of Rav Moshe [m].

All other days that we don’t say תחנון for example, ל"ג בעומר ט"ו שבט ט"ו באב an אבל may daven for the amud [n].
There is an opinion that rules that any day that you don’t say קל ארך אפים and למנצח an אבל should not daven for the amud. That would include ערב פסח, ט' באב, ערב יו"כ, שושן פורים, פורים קטן [o]. However, it’s clear from the source of the רמ''א that only days which הלל is said is there a minhag for an אבל not to be the ש''ץ. This minhag comes from a different source which doesn’t agree with the רמ''א. 

If the chazon for the shul during the ימים נוראים is an אבל he may daven for the עמוד if no one can replace him and his abilities [p]. On Shabbos and יו''ט if no one inspires the shul like him then he may be the Shatz [q], but just because he sounds good is not a heter.

The same applies to the reading of the מגילה if no one can pronounce the words and read כהלכה like him then he may read the מגילה [r]. Otherwise he should refrain.

Editor's remark:
The halacha that an aveil may daven for the amud on yomtov if the tzibbur needs him became relevant to a friend this past year. He had retained to daven on the Yamim Nor'aim, and he became an aveil the day before Rosh Hashannah. He was the only Shliach Tzibbur available for that certain shul. I told him to leave the Shiva house during shiva, and fly back to Chicago to daven for the Amud on Rosh Hashanna. 

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contactkollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828


מראה מקומות לדין אורח חיים
a) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:
b) גמרא מו"ק טו. וכא:
c) ע' רא"ש מו"ק פרק ג' סי' כ"ח ול"ח
מירושלמי ברכות ב:ז, רמב"ם אבל י:א. ש"ע שפה:ג.
d) שלמת חיים תכ"ה [קל"ג], גשה"ח כא:ז:ד-ז, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז
e) ע' לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז
f) רמ"א שפה:א
g) ש"ך יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ג' ומג"א או"ח תקנ"ד ס"ק כ"א
h) ע' בה"ט יו"ד שפ"ה ס"ק ב', מ"ב תקנ"ד ס"ק מ"א, לקט יושר עמ' ק"י, באר משה חלק ד' סי' ק"ו, להורות נתן חלק ב' סי' ל"ז
i) הובא ברמ"א יו"ד שפה:ג ובאו"ח תרצו:ו
j) ש"ע או"ח תרצו:ו עם מ"ב ס"ק י"ז
k) נחלת שבעה סי' י"ז וקובץ הלכות פרק ט"ו הע' מ"ד
l) מ"ב תרצ"ו ס"ק י"ח
m)  ע' מג"א או"ח תרצ"ו
n) כתב סופר או"ח סי' קמ"א
o) דברי למכיאל חלק ה' סי' רל"ז 

מראה מקומות לדין יורה דעה
a רמ"א יו"ד שע"ו
b) ש"ך שם סקי"ד בשם המהרי"ל
c) נו"ב או"ח סי' ל"ב
d) שו"ת מהרי"ל סי' כ"ב
e) רמ"א שם
f) מ"ב או"ח תקפ"א סק"ז
g) ערוך השלחן שע"ו סקי"ד
h) כל בו על אבילות עמ' רפ"ז
i) ערוך השלחן שם ועיין מהר"ם שיק או"ח קפ"ג שכן נוהג החת"ס
j) מ"ב תקפ"א סק"ז ותרע"א סקמ"ד ותרפ"ג סק"א
k) גליון מהרש"א סי' שע"ו ובא"ר או"ח סס"י תקפ"ב ופרמ"ג תרע"א מ"ז סק"ח וגשר החיים כ"ג:ה
l) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד בשם הפמ"ג וגשר החיים כ"ג:ד סברו לא התפלל ושו"ת מהר"ם מינץ מ"ג וערוך השלחן שם סברו יכול התפלל
m) רבבות אפרים ח"א תמ"ג בשם ר' משה
n) מ"ב תרע"א סקמ"ד וגשר החיים כ"ג:ו
o) מ"ב קל"ב במאמר קדישים ונועם מגדים להפמ"ג מנהגים א'
p) ש"ך שע"ו סקי"ד בשם מהרי"ו
q) כן משמע מדרכי משה במה שכתב "אף" ימים נוראים ומ"ב תקפ"א ז' ותרצ"ו י"ב ולא כב"ח יו"דשפ"ו
r) מ"ב תרצ"ו סקי"ב

To receive Points to Ponder weekly via email, please contact
kollelhoraah@gmail.com or text KHAWEEKLY to 22828

Sunday, February 24, 2019

Ki Sisa. Interesting Facts About the Chelbenah in the Ketores

The chelbe'na symbolizes "Poshei Yisrael," and RChbBiz in Krisus 6 says that a community fast that does not include sinners is not a fast at all.
Krisus 6b
א"ר חנא בר בזנא א"ר שמעון חסידא כל תענית שאין בה מפושעי ישראל אינה תענית שהרי חלבנה ריחה רע ומנאה הכתוב עם סממני קטרת אביי אמר מהכא (עמוס ט, ו) ואגודתו על ארץ יסדה
A similar thought is expressed in two other places.

Menachos 27a by the four minim on Sukkos
ד' מינין שבלולב ב' מהן עושין פירות וב' מהם אין עושין פירות העושין פירות יהיו זקוקין לשאין עושין ושאין עושין פירות יהיו זקוקין לעושין פירות ואין אדם יוצא ידי חובתו בהן עד שיהו כולן באגודה אחת
Maharsha there
ד' מינין שבלולב ב' מהן עושין פירות כו' וב' מהם אין עושין כו'. כל דברי המאמר מפורש בפיוט יום ראשון דסוכות וכמו בעץ הדר ריח וטעם כן כו' וכמו הם אגודים כו' ולכפר אלה על אלה כו' ע"ש באורך דהיינו ב' כתות מהן שעושין פירות דהיינו מעשים טובים נדמו לאתרוג ולולב שעושים פירות ושנים מכן שאין עושין פירות ומעשים טובים נדמו להדס ולערבה דאין עושין פירות וצריכין להיות אגודה א' שיגינו צדיקים על רשעים וק"ל:

Sanhedrin 37a by Yitzchak's bracha to Yaakov where it says וירח את ריח בגדיו.
סוגה בשושנים שאפילו כסוגה של שושנים לא יפרצו בהן פרצות והיינו דאמר ליה ההוא מינא לרב כהנא אמריתו נדה שרי לייחודי בהדי גברא אפשר אש בנעורת ואינה מהבהבת אמר ליה התורה העידה עלינו סוגה בשושנים שאפילו כסוגה בשושנים לא יפרצו בהן פרצות ריש לקיש אמר מהכא (שיר השירים ו, ז) כפלח הרמון רקתך אפילו ריקנין שבך מלאין מצות כרמון ר' זירא אמר מהכא (בראשית כז, כז) וירח את ריח בגדיו אל תיקרי בגדיו אלא בוגדיו 


There are four approaches to that statement.

1. They are sinners, but they still join us in the fast, and we should not reject them. (Rashi here)

2. They are sinners, but they still join us in the fast, and they play an important part in our community so we should welcome them. (Drashos HaRan Drush 1.)

3. This are only welcome when they are sincere about their tefillos, and want to do teshuva, but they are not strong enough to really do teshuva, so our prayers will join with theirs and enhance their Teshuva. (Maharal, his neighbor the Kli Yakar, and their contemporary the Mabit, and the Chida.)

4. This are only welcome if they already did teshuva. If they didn't, we don't want them. (Rabbeinu Gershom in Krisus, the Maharsha in Krisus.)



Another interesting fact about the Chelbenah for Purim:

We all know that Mordechai is alluded to in the fragrances that comprised the shemen hamishcha in Mor Deror, translated as "Mira Dachya." This Mor was also used in the Ketores - the Mor that we mention in Pittum HaKetores, which is among the other ingredients that are not explicit in the Torah. (The Ramban/Malbim in 30:34 say they are hinted at in the word "Samim" that begins the Ketores, which means "take the samim mentioned above that were used in the Shemen HaMishcha, and also....."  However, the Avnei Nezer holds that the Mor (cholem) in the Shemen HaMishcha was musk from the musk ox and the Mor (kametz) in the Ketores was a plant derivative.)   Not everyone knows that the Chelbe'nah, in the Ketores, is the same gematria as Haman. Off the cuff, this might be reflected in the fact that Haman's grandchildren were talmidei chachamim. Alternatively, it might be because it was Haman's threat of extermination that led to Kimu v'Kiblu. And, of course, many baalei machshava have said that the former is related to the latter.

It would be nice if we could find a connection between the Ketores and Esther, but all I can think of is the fact that she was perfumed for a year in several of the ingredients used in the ketores, a pretty poor connection - ששה חודשים בשמן המר וששה חדשים בבשמים. Or that she was called Hadassa, a fragrant plant, but it is not an ingredient of the Ketores.

Alternatively, we could say that Esther was not merumaz in the Ketores, but she is in the daled minim, in the Hadassim. True, the Haddas is a symbol of maasim tovim without peiros, but, unfortunately, that was Esther's fate as well, considering that her children were not part of Klal  Yisrael. So both Mordechai/Mor Dror, and Esther/Haddas, are present in places where they are bound up with people without any zechusim of their own, the Chelbenah and the Aravos. 

Friday, February 22, 2019

Ki Sisa. The Daf Yomi and Bittul Torah

My father זכר צדיק לברכה discouraged me from learning Daf Yomi. He was among the great talmidim of Slabodka in Litteh, and all the Gedolei Yisrael looked forward to talking to him in learning, including his chavrusa (and upstairs neighbor) Reb Chaim Zimmerman, his dear friend and telephone chavrusa Reb Chaim Stein, his mechutan Reb Moshe, and the Ponovezher Rov. He was one of those legendary Bnei Torah that actually kept their feet in a pail of cold water so they could stay awake longer. He spent ten years in Slabodka, and all those years he learned with one chavrusa, Reb Leizer Platzinski. He said that they learned the Gemara three times. The first time, he knew it better. The second time, they were equal. The third time, he said, Reb Leizer knew it better. When they shared a room, Reb Leizer got the bed and my father slept on the floor, because Reb Leizer was from the Alter's family.

The point is that my father embodied the Gadlus of the Torah of Litteh and the hashkafos of the Slabodker Yeshiva. He discouraged my interest in the daf because he believed that real limmud meant iyun, and the daf did not allow serious iyun. He felt that the time would be better spent learning more slowly and carefully.

For what my opinion is worth, I think that the Daf can have tremendous value. It broadens the perspective, and it mandates a discipline that ensures that a day does not go by without learning. Also, for many people the camaraderie and interaction of the Daf is a tremendous mechayeiv, and without it, many people would not go to any shiur at all. If you stick to it, you will end up learning a velt. I've seen many people grow from total ignorance to serious Yediyas HaTorah and Halacha l'maiseh from taking the Daf seriously. Certainly, everyone should go through the cycle once, and chazer. But I also understand what my father meant, and I believe that a person that a yeshivamahn that does not spend serious time b'iyun because he is busy learning the Daf is oiver on bittul Torah. His wily Yetzer Hara knows that he can't take him away from the precious Torah, so he gives him a keviyas ittim that prevents him from real ameilus, which is, for him, Bittul Torah, with a capital B.

In our parsha, passuk 32:15
  והלחת מעשה אלהים המה והמכתב מכתב אלהים הוא חרות על הלחת

In Avos 6:2 the Mishna says


אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי, בכל יום ויום בת קול יוצאת מהר חורב ומכרזת ואומרת, אוי להם לבריות מעלבונה של תורה. שכל מי שאינו עוסק בתורה נקרא נזוף, שנאמר (משלי יא) נזם זהב באף חזיר אשה יפה וסרת טעם. ואומר (שמות לב) והלחת מעשה אלהים המה והמכתב מכתב אלהים הוא חרות על הלחת, אל תקרא חרות אלא חרות, שאין לך בן חורין אלא מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה. וכל מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה הרי זה מתעלה, שנאמר (במדבר כא) וממתנה נחליאל ומנחליאל במות:

Rav Bergman in his new Shaarei Orah here says

פשטות כוונת רבי יהושע בן לוי היא שכל מי שאינו עוסק בתורה, מלבד עצם עוון ביטול תורה, יש במעשיו משום עלבון לתורה. שהרי הקב״ה ברחמיו נתן לנו חמדה גנוזה, יקרה מפנינים, וראוי לכל איש ישראל להדבק בה ללא הפסק, ואם אין עושים זאת אלא משאירים את התורה מונחת בקרן זוית, דבר זה נחשב ל׳עלבונה של תורה׳.

אך באמת מהפסוק שהביא - ׳נזם זהב באף חזיר׳ - משמע לא כך. שהרי ביאור הפסוק הוא כדברי רש״י: ״׳נזם זהב באף חזיר׳ - שמלכלך אותה באשפות, כן תלמיד חכם הסר מן הדרך הטובה. ׳אשה יפה וסרת טעם׳ - פורש מן התורה״, ואם אינו עוסק בתורה אם כן אין כאן לא ׳נזם זהב׳ ולא ׳אשה יפה'.  על כרחנו צריכים אנו לבאר שאין כוונת רבי יהושע בן לוי למי שאינו .לומד כלל, אלא מדובר באדם שלומד תורה רק שאינו עושה ממנה ׳עסק', ו'עסק׳ היינו כמו שכתב הב״ח (אר"ח מ'ז ג) בביאור לשון הברכה ׳לעסוק בתורה׳: ״שעיקר ההבטחה שהבטיחנו הוא יתברך לא היתה אלא על עסק התורה. היא העמל והטורח וכו', לכך תקנו לברך "לעסוק בדברי תורה״, וכן כתב הט״ז(שם סק״א) ״עיקר מעלת עוסקים בתורה דוקא דרך טורח ויגיעה, ואל זה כיונו בברכה ׳לעסוק, בדברי תורה,. דרך לימוד התורה היא דוקא על ידי עסק ויגיעה בעומק העיון, רק אז מובטחים אנו למצוא את המטמונים החבויים בה, ורק על לימוד כזה אמרו חז״ל (מגילה ו:) אם יאמר לך אדם יגעתי ולא מצאתי אל תאמן, לא יגעתי ומצאתי אל תאמן, יגעתי ומצאתי תאמן, ויש לדקדק בפירוש רש״י לאבות (וי״א שהוא  פירוש הרמב״ם) שכתב לבאר: נזם זהב באף חזיר שאינו משמרו אלא הולך ונובר באשפה וממאיס, כן  תלמיד חכם שחסר מטעמים של תורה הוא מאוס כמנודה הזה״, כלומר שמי שאינו יגע בתורה בעומקה אינו זוכה למצוא את ה׳מטעמים של  תורה' 

וכבר אמר בזה הסבא מסלבודקא שכל מי שיכול ללמוד בעומק וביגיעה ואינו עושה זאת, נחשב לו הדבר כבטול תורה, ולמד זאת מדברי הגמרא בריש מגילה (ג:) שמבטלין תלמוד תורה למקרא מגילה, והרי גם מקרא מגילה נחשב לתלמוד תורה? אלא מוכח שכיון שבמקרא מגילה חסר לו לאדם את הלימוד בעומק, ממילא נחשב הדבר כבטול תורה. וכן דרשו חז״ל במגילה (ג.) ״וילן יהושע בלילה ההוא בתוך העמק, אמר רבי יוחנן מלמד שלן בעומקה של הלכה״, כלומר שגם קודם לכן למד תורה, אלא שהיה חסר לו ב׳עומקה של הלכה׳, ומבאר שגם חסרון זה נחשב לבטול תורה.

על זה אומר רבי יהושע בן לוי שכל מי שאינו עוסק בתורה כראוי, אף אם הוא לומד אך לא מתעסק ומתייגע כפי שיכול   לעשות, הרי זה עלבונה של תורה, והוא בבחינת ׳נזם זהב באף חזיר, אשה יפה וסרת טעם׳. כי כיון שאינו עמל ומתייגע, חסר לו הן מצד עצם לימוד התורה, והן משום שאינו זוכה למצוא בתורה את ה׳מטעמים׳ הטמונים בה. מובן מאד איפוא שלימוד כזה הוא ׳עלבונה של תורה׳.

מדברים אלו יש ללמוד עומק נוסף בחובת כבוד תלמידי חכמים העוסקים בתורה בכל כוחם. כי חוץ מעצם זכות למוד התורה שלהם, הם גם מעלבונה על ידי כך שהם מתייגעים ומוצאים את המטעמים הטמונים בה.

I took the liberty of quoting Rav Bergman because I also heard this from the Alter from both my father and my Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Rudderman.  Also, I was amazed at his strong language - נזם זהב באף חזיר. But he's making a point, and he wants it to make a roshem.  

I have nothing to add, other than to explain the segue to the the second half of the Mishna which discusses the passuk in our Parsha. 

ואומר (שמות לב) והלחת מעשה אלהים המה והמכתב מכתב אלהים הוא חרות על הלחת, אל תקרא חרות אלא חרות, שאין לך בן חורין אלא מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה. וכל מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה הרי זה מתעלה, שנאמר (במדבר כא) וממתנה נחליאל ומנחליאל במות:

The Mishna is telling us that in order to be mis'alleh, in order to not be an eved to the Yetzer Hara, in order to be a Ben Chorin, it's not enough to learn. You need davka Yegiah to the extent you are able.

In a Mashal Hedyot, but a useful and true Mashal Hedyot, let me add something from my own observation of חילוץ עצמות. There's a method of exercise popularized by a Dr Doug McGuff called Body by Science, described as "a weekly high-intensity program for increasing strength, revving metabolism, and building muscle for a total fitness experience." To me, the word "fitness" is misused. Fitness means the ability to do your task well. Fitness for a stevedore is very different from fitness for a CPA. But one thing I do know, and that is that my seventy year old brother, he should be maarich yammim v'shanim, went from being overweight and practically handicapped to having the energy and appearance of an athletic twenty five year old. He looks, as he did in days of yore, intimidating and formidable. Setting aside his meshugassen with Atkins and supplements, this is all because he took on this program. 

The program discourages treadmills and daily workouts and instructs you to work against resistance to the absolute limits of your ability. A curl, for example, should take ten seconds up and ten seconds down, and it should be the maximum weight you can handle. When I visited my brother, he took me to his gym and put me through the paces, and he enjoyed watching me stagger out of the gym, and then wake up the next morning feeling like I was experiencing rigor mortis while still alive.

I am making a point. We develop when we work to the limits of our ability, not when we just do easier things again and again and again. If you want to be a real Ben Torah, then you need to invest yourself intellectually to the absolute limit of your ability. Do not let the Yetzer Hara trick you into using the Daf Yomi as an way to cripple you.



NOTES AND COMMENTS:

Reb Avi Lencz showed us the Beis Ephraim, as follows:

בגמ' מגילה ג' ע"א אמרו דמבטלים תלמוד תורה לשמוע קריאת המגילה, והקשו המפרשים והרי קריאת המגילה ג"כ לימוד התורה, ותירץ הבית אפרים דחסרון בעמקות הלימוד וערכה הוא ג"כ בחינה של ביטול תורה. וא"כ י"ל הכא, דאכן יושב בדין כעוסק בתורה, אבל הצטערו הני אמוראי על שלא היו יכולים להעמיק בלימוד ולהוסיף פלפול ולקח, שזה הוא כביטול תורה וכנ"ל.

Reb Micha, of course, refers us to the Aruch Hashulchan, whose words encapsulates the issue. We really need to carefully analyze what limmud is optimal, and to follow through on a plan. A realist, though, recognizes that for some people, the only likelihood of success is through the Chevreh Ein Yaakov, or the Daf Yomi.

Micha's words:
I consider the Arukh haShulchan's comment to typify Litvishe attitudes toward daf yomi. Or, in his day, the chevrah shas -- which also typically covered a daf a day, it just wasn't coordinated with other shuls' chevrei shas.
AhS YD 246:17:
... וט"ז סעיף קטן א שכתב בשם הדרישה: הבעלי בתים שלומדים רק איזה שעות ביום טוב, יותר שילמדו ספרי פוסקים ולא גמרא, עיין שם. ובוודאי שעל כל איש לידע דיני "אורח חיים", ומקצת דינים מ"יורה דעה" ו"חושן משפט" ו"אבן העזר" המוכרחים לכל איש, עיין שם בהלכות תלמוד תורה להגרש"ז ז"ל. אמנם ראינו כי אם כה נאמר להם – לא ילמדו כלל, כי רצונם רק ללמוד דף גמרא בכל יום. על כן אין להניאם, והלואי יעמדו בזה. וכל דבר תורה משיבת נפש, ומביאה ליראת ה' טהורה.

Tuesday, February 05, 2019

Terumah: Always, Constant, Forever. Tamid in the Mishkan and on Purim

Several years ago, I posted the following on the word "Tamid."  That discussion actually relates very nicely to Rosh Chodesh Adar Rishon, as we will demonstrate.


In (Teruma and Titzaveh) we come across the word Tamid many times.  Once you're on the lookout, you will realize that it is found here at a frequency far greater than anywhere else in Tanach.   What you may not realize is this:
The word תמיד appears in the Torah exactly 24 times, either as תמיד  or as התמיד. How many of those times are in dinim of Kodshim?
Twenty three.
Of the twenty four in Chumash, twenty three are in dinim of Kodshim.  "HaTamid" appears seven times, every single one in kodshim.  Of the seventeen 'Tamids' in the Torah, sixteen are Kodshim and one is not.  The single, the solitary, the sole exception is in Devarim 11:12.

אֶ֕רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ דֹּרֵ֣שׁ אֹתָ֑הּ תָּמִ֗יד עֵינֵ֨י יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ בָּ֔הּ מֵֽרֵשִׁית֙ הַשָּׁנָ֔ה וְעַ֖ד אַחֲרִ֥ית שָׁנָֽה׃
A land the Lord, your God, looks after; the eyes of Lord your God are upon it constantly from the beginning of the year to the end of the year.

In a case like this, it is obvious that the exception proves the rule: that the one ostensible anomaly actually teaches us something important about the other iterations.  I intend to speak about this at greater length in Vayikra, but I will put it briefly here:  תמיד is a state of being.  In an ephemeral, time-bound world, תמיד can truly apply only at its nexus with the eternal, where the physical and the spiritual are kneaded together.  Hashgacha Pratis is another manifestation of this integration.  The physical cannot be permanent; solidity is a symptom of impermanence.  It is that which appears to our senses to be insubstantial, the spiritual, that can be permanent.
The main focus of this post is to discuss the various meanings the word has, and also to analyze its place in the structure of certain sentences.
In these two parshios, the word תמיד is found regarding:
the Lechem Hapanim/Shulchan,
the Menorah,
the Choshen Hamishpat (twice),
the Tzitz,
the Korban Tamid (twice),
and the Ketores.
But 'Constant' is inconstant.  The meaning of the word varies with almost every application.  Sometimes it means constant/every night, sometimes it means constant/every twelve hours, and sometimes it means constant/every second of every day.  Sometimes תמיד means that the object itself should be constantly present, sometimes it refers to the object's effect, and sometimes constancy means there should be no lapse of attention.  In our parsha, Rashi mentions this twice: in 27:20 by the Menora and in 29:42 by the Olas Tamid.  Rashi in Chagiga 26b also discusses this, saying that תמיד in the Menora is like by the Olas Tamid and the Chavitin, that 24 hours shouldn't go by without them, but by the Shulchan, it means (according to the Rabanan in Shabbos 133b) constant without a moment's lapse.  In English, the words "continuous" and "continual"  and "constant" distinguish among various sorts of tamid, but in Lashon Hakodesh we often have single words comprising numerous variations, and we are expected to determine the specific meaning from drashos or context.
The Mizrachi and the Gur Aryeh in this parsha speak briefly about the variation.  Nothing I've seen is completely satisfying, and I wouldn't even bother trying to find the principle myself.  (In fact, the Mizrachi, Gur Aryeh, Malbim and others here assume that Tosfos in Chagia 26 argues with Rashi regarding the Menorah, that Rashi holds it means every night, and Tosfos holds it refers to the Ner Maaravi, but I don't see that is what Tosfos means.  Not only is Tosfos not arguing on Rashi at all, I think that Tosfos is reinforcing Rashi's pshat.)

Now let's talk about sentence structure.  Reb Shimon (Yoma 7b) says that regarding the Tzitz, in the passuk of והיה על מצחו ,תמיד לרצון להם the word תמיד is tied to the following words-- Tamid Le'Ratzon; Reb Yehuda holds it finishes the first phrase-- Ahl Mitzcho Tamid. ;Reb Shimon says a similar thing in another context in Menachos 23. The Shaagas Aryeh in Teshuvos OC 38 writes one of his oft cited pieces on the Rambam's psak regarding the machlokes on the Tamid of the Tzitz, as it applies to Tefillin
טומאה דחויה בציבור כרב שמעון, אפילו אינו על מצחו מרצה כרב שמעון, לא יסיח דעתו מן הציץ ומן התפילין כרב יהודה.)

It's interesting that in the passuk in Devarim 11:12, the word תמיד can be read either way, too, and the Trop shows that it is read as the first word of the second phrase. There's an esnachta under the preceding word. 
(אֶ֕רֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ דֹּרֵ֣שׁ אֹתָ֑הּ) תָּמִ֗יד עֵינֵ֨י יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ בָּ֔הּ מֵֽרֵשִׁית֙ הַשָּׁנָ֔ה וְעַ֖ד אַחֲרִ֥ית שָׁנָֽה׃

In Maariv, both at the end of the first bracha and at the end of the last bracha (Baruch Hashem Le'olam, which is not said in Israel, but is said in most places in the US,) there is a word that is called אין לה הכרע.  This means that we do not know whether it belongs at the end of the first half of the sentence or the beginning of the second.  This word is, of course, תמיד.  In the last bracha, it goes המלך בכבודו תמיד ימלוך עלינו לעולם ועד.  Tamid might mean בכבודו תמיד, or it might be intended to mean  תמיד ימלוך עלינו לעולם ועד.  Before saying "Ha, it can't mean the latter, because then it would be repetitive!" please note that the Magen Avraham in  OC 236 favors that way of saying it, without offering any explanation.  The Abudraham says like the Magen Avraham.  On the other hand, the Prisha there, and the Eliahu Rabba brought in the Machtzis Hashekel there, disagree and say it ends the first phrase.   Also, as I mentioned before, the word תמיד in the passuk in Devarim 11:12 seems redundant exactly as our sentence does- תמיד/mei'reishis hashana ve'ahd achris hashana is just likeתמיד/le'olam va'ed.
great Unknown said"we have a parallel construct in "la'ad ul'e olmai olamim [or olmai olmaya"," where no rephrasing is possible. Similarly, "l'olam ul'e olmai olamim."It is possible that we are dealing here with olam hazeh and olam haba."
The Magen Avraham is particularly interesting to me because around eleven years ago, my father Ztz'l davenned on his father's yahrtzeit and said it like the Magen Avraham.  I heard it from him so the same a year later, but even without hearing it again, my father, who could finish any passuk in Tanach if you read him the first half, simply did not make mistakes.  I found it interesting that the Magen Avraham's opinion has survived in a world of homogenized nusach and "right way" "wrong way" attitudes.
So, coincidentally, the word תמיד in Maariv and in the passuk of the Tzitz is ein lah hechra.  This really doesn't mean that Reb Shimon and Reb Yehuda's approaches would yield different meanings to the sentence in Maariv, because it obviously depends on the context.  But certainly, the Magen Avraham's opinion echoes Reb Shimon's pshat in the passuk by the Tzitz, and also the passuk in Devarim, where it would make perfect sense as the end of the first phrase but is given the Trop as the first word of the second phrase.
********************************************************

The reason I re-posted this is because of the marvelous Rema in Orach Chaim that pertains specifically to today's date, February 5, 2019, Rosh Chodesh Adar I (תשע"ט.) 


The last Rema in Orach Chaim is on the topic of Purim and Adar Rishon. OC 697:
אין אומרים תחנה בי"ד וט"ו שבאדר ראשון ודין תענית והספד בהן ובו סעיף אחד:
יום י"ד וט"ו שבאדר ראשון אין נופלין על פניהם ואין אומרים מזמור יענך ה' ביום צרה ואסורים בהספד ותענית אבל שאר דברים אין נוהגים בהם וי"א דאף בהספד ותענית מותרים: הגה והמנהג כסברא ראשונה. י"א שחייב להרבות במשתה ושמחה בי"ד שבאדר ראשון (טור בשם הרי"ף) ואין נוהגין כן מ"מ ירבה קצת בסעודה כדי לצאת ידי המחמירים (הג"מ בשם סמ"ק) וטוב לב משתה תמיד:

The Shaarei Teshuva brings the Chida's observation that the Rema chose these closing words very carefully to echo his first words on Orach Chaim, where he said

הגה שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד הוא כלל גדול בתורה ובמעלות הצדיקים אשר הולכים לפני האלהים כי אין ישיבת האדם ותנועותיו ועסקיו והוא לבדו בביתו כישיבתו ותנועותיו ועסקיו והוא לפני מלך גדול ולא דבורו והרחבת פיו כרצונו והוא עם אנשי ביתו וקרוביו כדבורו במושב המלך כ"ש כשישים האדם אל לבו שהמלך הגדול הקב"ה אשר מלא כל הארץ כבודו עומד עליו ורואה במעשיו כמו שנאמר אם יסתר איש במסתרים ואני לא אראנו נאום ה' מיד יגיע אליו הירא' וההכנעה בפחד הש"י ובושתו ממנו תמיד (מורה נבוכים ח"ג פ' כ"ב) ולא יתבייש מפני בני אדם המלעיגים עליו בעבודת הש"י גם בהצנע לכת ובשכבו על משכבו ידע לפני מי הוא שוכב ומיד כשיעור משנתו יקום בזריזות לעבודת בוראו יתברך ויתעלה (טור): 

He explains 
.......................................מסיים רמ"א וטוב לב משתה תמיד ועיין ברכי יוסף שכת' מור"מ ז"ל בחכמה יסד חתימה מעין פתיחה שני תמידין כסדרן הוא פתח בריש הגהותיו שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד וחתם וטוב לב משתה תמיד כו' ע"ש


And most interesting in the connection to Purim, are the words of the Imrei Emes. He brings the Girsa of the Ein Yaakov (Gittin 57b) that Rav Shmuel bar Shilas was the descendant of Haman who learned in Bnei Brak. He brings from the Ari Za"l that the letters of the name bar Shilas are the first letters of shivisi Hashem l'negdi samid. He adds that the appellation of Mordechai HaTzadik, "Yehudi," are the last letters of that phrase. Thus, Rav Shmuel bar Shilas epitomized the lesson of שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד, and absolutely contradicted the middah ra'ah of Haman by embodying the middah tova of Mordechai Hatzadik. The holiday of Purim, the high point of a month of מרבים בשמחה, a month which epitomizes טוב לב משתה תמיד, is  best understood by looking at those individuals, Mordechai HaTzadik and Rav Shmuel bar Shilas, whose very names expressed their lives of שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד.


אמרי אמת - שושן פורים

ותשם אסתר את מרדכי על בית המן, הם הוציאו כל ניצוצות הקדושה מקליפת המן.
איתא מבני בניו של המן למדו תורה בבני ברק. ואיתא בעין יעקב, ומנו רב שמואל בר שילת. 
איתא מהאר"י ז"ל דשיל"ת הוא ר"ת שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד, רב שמואל בר שילת היה מייחד יחודים חדשים בכל יום, וזהו שאיתא בגמרא הטיילין בכל יום וכו' כגון רב שמואל בר שילת, כשנמצאים תמיד במלכות שמים אין לנו שעבודים אחרים, וזהו שויתי וגו' כי מימיני בל אמוט. 
שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד ס"ת יהודי, איתא בגמרא בבא בתרא שרב שמואל בר שילת היה מלמד תינוקות ולימד לו רב כי מחית לינוקא לא תימחי אלא  בערקתא דמסנא. דקארי קארי דלא קארי ליהוי צוותא לחבריה. וברש"י וסופו לתת לב. 
ערקתא דמסנא זהו רמז למה שאיתא שבשעת השמד צריך למסור נפש אפילו על ערקתא דמסנא, וזה קיים מרדכי דכתיב ולא קם ולא זע ממנו היינו משום דאיתא שהמן עשה עצמו עבודה זרה, ורב שמואל בר שילת הכניס זאת בכל בני ישראל שימסרו עצמם. ואף שכבר הלך מאתנו, דעתו עלינו. וזה שאיתא עוד בגמרא  דרב אשכחיה לרב שמואל בר שילת דהוה קאי בגינתא א" ל שבקתיה להימנותך! א"ל הא תליסר שנין  דלא חזיא לי והשתא נמי דעתאי עלויהו. 
דלא קארי ליהוי צוותא לחבריה היינו כדאיתא כל העולם כולו לא נברא אלא לצוות לזה, ועל ידי זה מתעלים הכל, וזהו וסופו לתת לב. 
וכן מרדכי הכניע את כל היהודים אליו כדאיתא בשפת אמת שזהו שכתוב ושאר היהודים שנעשו שיריים אליו, פורים נותן כח על כל השנה וזהו כי מימיני בל אמוט


In light of what I had written about the word תמיד, that the word whose literal meaning is  "constant" is ironically inconstant, one can say that the different types of תמידיות also apply to the uses of the word in Shivisi samid and Mishteh tamid - there's tamid, and then there's tamid. The Rema says that it is כדי לצאת ידי המחמירים that one should make the decision to be marbeh ktzas b'simcha. ותן לחכם ויחכם עוד.