Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Rashbam and Ibn Ezra on Tefillin

לז"נ ר' אבא ז"ל בן ר' יצחק אייזיק ז"ל הי"ד יאקאבאוויטש

והיה לך לאות על ידך ולזכרון בין עיניך למען תהיה תורת הוי"ה בפיך, כי ביד חזקה הוצאך הוי"ה ממצרים (שמות יג, ט)

Though it is not explicit in the language of the Written Law, Chazal teach us in the Oral Law that the intent of this verse is to the commandment of תפילין של יד ושל ראש. However, the connection of יציאת מצרים to למען תהיה תורת הוי"ה בפיך is unclear. How will the act of wearing תפילין ensure that the תורת ה' will actually remain בפיך?

Rashbam, in his commentary on this verse, rouses the ire of Ibn Ezra with a short explanation that he believes to be the פשוטו של מקרא. Rashbam writes, לפי עומק פשוטו, יהיה לך לזכרון תמיד כאילו כתוב על ידך, כעין שימני כחותם על לבך. According to this, the simple reading imparts to us that the memory of the exodus from Egypt should be ingrained in our hearts as if it was written on our hands. Ibn Ezra fiercely attacks Rashbam for this comment, though he does not mention his name, referring only to יש חולקים על אבותינו הקדושים. Although Ibn Ezra himself is willing, in many places, to explain a verse כפי פשוטו של מקרא, even at variance with an interpretation of Chazal, here he refuses to do so, because Rashbam’s interpretation is against הלכה, thus opening the door for the Karaites to reject the commandment to wear תפילין. However, apparently Rashbam had no problem with this, which begs the question – why not?

Rav Shimon Schwab explains that this comment of Rashbam evokes his general approach to פשט and דרש. (See Rashbam’s comments at the beginning of פרשת וישב and פרשת משפטים.) When it comes to הלכה, we always follow the Oral Law. Nevertheless, when coming to understand the Written Law, אין מקרא יוצא מידי פשוטו, for to reject the simple reading would be to ignore immeasurable lessons that have been imparted to us through the Written Law. In this case, Rav Schwab notes, the פשוטו של מקרא contains a vital lesson that applies to our life daily. The Gemara (ברכות יד:) teaches that one who recites קריאת שמע without תפילין is akin to bearing false testimony.  How then, are we able to recite קריאת שמע at night, or on Shabbos and Yom Tov, when we are not wearing תפילין? For this, says Rav Schwab, we require the message of the פשוטו של מקרא, so that when we recite קריאת שמע with the memory of יציאת מצרים ingrained in our inner being, we will not be guilty of bearing false testimony.

I would suggest that the inverse of this concept is true as well. In a well-known exposition on the Rambam regarding כוונה בתפילה, Rav Chaim Soloveitchik develops the idea that תפילה, by definition, is the encounter between man and God, and therefore, תפילה without כוונה is a misnomer. If one is not cognizant of the fact that he is standing before his Creator during תפילה, he is simply muttering meaningless words. This is not תפילה; Rav Chaim terms such a person to be a מתעסק בעלמא. In a similar vein, this idea may be applied to one who wears תפילין without internalizing the message of תפילין. (See שו"ת שאגת אריה בענין היסח הדעת בתפילין) Rav Samson Raphael Hirsch, in Horeb (page 178) notes that the words תפילין and תפילה derive from the same root – התפלל. In his words, “The tefillin tell you by their very name that they must achieve for you a submission of your inner self to God through the clarifying influence of a sound judgement of the ultimate values in life; that the content of the parshiyoth must be taken to heart in addition to the mere act of putting the tefillin on.” (Trans. of Dayan Grunfeld)



With this we can understand the connection in the פסוק, according to Rashbam’s פשוטו של מקרא. The תפילין are to be an אות and זכרון to be ingrained into our moral fiber. Only if the פרשיות are “as if they are sealed on your heart” will the act of donning תפילין engender a תורת ה' בפיך. Perhaps we may suggest, that while Rav Schwab explains that the פשוטו של מקרא is necessary for the moments when we are not wearing תפילין, to still have the concept of תפילין bound figuratively to our inner essence, the inverse is true as well. Even when we perform the mere act of donning תפילין, if that act does not carry with it the proper frame of mind, if we are not cognizant of the symbolism of the תפילין, it is as if we are figuratively not wearing them.

2 comments:

  1. Do you think that Harambam's comments in More Hanevuchim about עין תחת עין (I think it's 3:43 or around there) can be viewed from a similar perspective?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for commenting! If I have deciphered your initials correctly, long time no speak!
      At first glance one could learn the Rambam that way (I think you are referring to 3:41),but i have a reason not to. I will look into it once I'm finished with finals.

      Delete