From Iyov to prove that a person's tefillos work?

2) [line 10, 11] "V'SIGZAR OMER V'YAKAM LACH; V'AL DERACHECHA NAGAH OR." - "You shall also decree a thing and it shall be established for you, and the light shall shine upon your ways." (Iyov 22:28) - Elifaz ha'Teimani tells Iyov that if a person is righteous, he will have the opportunity to have all that he decrees come about. Chazal learn that this applies to all true Tzadikim. The Gemara rules that the Machkir can claim that his prayers for the success of his crops only apply to those crops that he instructed the Chocher to plant.

1) AGADAH: INEXACT PRAYER

The Gemara says that when a sharecropper ("Chocher") does not plant the type of crop that he told the owner he would plant, and then the crop that he planted is smitten by blight, even if all the surrounding fields are also smitten he may not pay a reduced fee for the land. The Gemara explains that the owner can claim, "I prayed that Hash-m would protect the type of crop that I wanted you to plant there. Had you planted the type of crop for which I prayed, then Hash-m would have listened to my prayers. Now that you planted a different crop, my prayers were meaningless" (RASHI DH v'Sigzar Omer).

The MESHECH CHOCHMAH (Parshas Chukas) finds a source for this concept in the Torah. The Torah says that when Amalek came to attack Yisrael in the year before they entered Eretz Yisrael, the Amalekim spoke the language of the Kena'anim in order to thwart the prayers of the Jewish people. The Amalekim hoped that the Jewish people would think that the approaching enemies were Kena'anim and would pray to Hash-m to vanquish the Kena'anim. They would not be saved because their enemies were really Amalekim and not Kena'anim. The Jewish people, however, saw that something was amiss when they saw the Amalekite clothing and heard the language of Kena'an. They decided to pray to Hash-m without specifying a name, and they prayed that Hash-m should defeat "that nation." This implies that prayers are not answered if a person inadvertently prays for the wrong thing.

According to this explanation, however, the sharecropper should be able to reply to the fieldowner that he should not have prayed for a specific crop, but rather he should have prayed for whatever crop was planted in the field. Why does the Gemara rule that the sharecropper may not pay a reduced rate? The answer is that TOSFOS (DH l'Nisa) writes that a much greater miracle is required for a person's prayers to be answered if he does not articulate the specific item for which he is praying. Tosfos might have come to this conclusion based on this very question. The fieldowner can justify the fact that he prayed for a specific type of crop because he did not feel that he was worthy of being answered if he would not specify the crop, because that would have required a much greater miracle.

2) THE FIELDOWNER'S PRAYER

QUESTION: The Gemara says that when a sharecropper ("Chocher") does not plant the type of crop that he told the owner he would plant, and then the crop that he planted is smitten by blight, even if all the surrounding fields are also smitten he may not pay a reduced fee for the land. The Gemara explains that the owner can claim, "I prayed that Hash-m would protect the type of crop that I wanted you to plant there. Had you planted the type of crop for which I prayed, then Hash-m would have listened to my prayers. Now that you planted a different crop, my prayers were meaningless" (RASHI DH v'Sigzar Omer; see previous Insight).

Why does this claim obligate the sharecropper to pay the full amount of the "Chakirus"? The sharecropper should have a counter-claim: that there is no certainty that Hash-m would have answered the fieldowner's prayers even if the proper crop had been planted. Since it is a doubt, the sharecropper should not be forced to pay (since, in any monetary case involving a doubt, the Halachah is "ha'Motzi me'Chaveiro Alav ha'Re'ayah"). (DEVAR YAKOV

Best regards!

Noach miTelshestone, Israel