The turning point in the diaspora of Mitzrayim, the first crack in the hester panim - the hiddenness of Hashem and the distance from Him that we felt - came in response to the prayers that consumed our hearts at that time:
"vayehi bayomim horabim hoheim vayomos melech mitzrayim vayayanchu Bnai Yisroel min hoAvodah vayizaku vata'al shavasom el hoElokim min hoAvodah. Vayishma Eolkim es na'akasam vayizkor Elokim es briso es Avraham es Yitzchak v'es Yaakov. Vayar Elokim es Bnai Yisroel vayedah Elokim - [After the Egyptian king died] the Jews groaned due to the labor, they yelled and their screams rose up to Hashem from their labor. Hashem heard their shrieks and He recalled His covenant with Avrohom with Yitzchok and with Yaakov."
Indeed, as we have pointed out in this space in the past, it is unclear from the text whether we were in fact shouting out to Hashem altogether. Ohr Hachayim points this out and interprets that whereas our shrieks were pure expressions of our torment and despondency, Hashem received them and responded to them as if we were indeed davening. Accentuating this ambiguity is that Hashem hears "na'akasam" even as the Jews offered up "shav'asam" and "za'akasam". Thus Hashem records for us that long before He revealed to us his absolute and responsive mastery over all matters, He was for us a "shomeah tefillah".
The Rov zt"l, who left this world on Pesach, and who often discussed the absurdity of the individual bringing his personal requirements to the attention of the A-mighty, suggested that this phrase catches the attribute of Hashem that encourages what would otherwise defy all logic. In other words, being a listener is a defining characteristic of Hashem, much as Rachum v'Chanun and other descriptions that Hashem has provided for us. This is how the Rov explained a seeming incongruity in our Shmone Esrei. It makes ample sense to request wisdom from the one who provides wisdom to all and to request cures from the one who heals. Does it make sense, in the next to last brocho of request, i.e. the brocho of Shomeah Tefillah, to ask for anything other than empathy from a "great listener"?
Thus the Rov explained that Hashem, as a Shomeah Tefillah, invites us to request even that which would seem to be insignificant from Hashem's perspective. This attribute allows us to daven from our perspective, to ask what is meaningful to us even though we could not ask for it would we consider Hashem's perspective.
The significance of this part of our relationship with Hashem is underscored by a Rashi on the Asseres Hadibros. It is in the very first commandment that Rashi (Shemos 20:2) teaches us to grapple with its formulation prohibiting the service of "other gods". Rashi argues that it cannot be read literally without giving a measure of credibility to some aspect of divinity of a pagan system, and that would be offensive to the Ribono Shel Olam. At first Rashi explains that "others" (presumably unworthy humans) appointed these idols as gods for themselves. The second interpretation explains the falseness and deceptiveness of these gods, as they are "others" to those who serve them, i.e. they do not answer when they appeal to them and act as if they don't recognize the supplicant at all.
Therefore it is clear that the placement of this comment at the head of the Decalogue, as monotheism is being described, instructs us to appreciate that Hashem's responsiveness to us is not only a license for one particular brocho and request, but distinguishes our core beliefs in a most meaningful manner. It follows, quite counterintuitively, that it is because He presented himself as the ultimate Shomeah Tefillah that almost every prayer is meaningful, and that allows otherwise insignificant concerns to connect us to our Creator.
Hashem introduced us to his trait of Shomeah Tefillah as He opened to us the phases of His revelation and the steps of our redemption. Interestingly, He described Himself as listening to our na'okos - groans - rather than our tefilos. Moreover, according to Rabbi Yochonon (Medrash Rabbah, beginning of Parshas Va'eschanan) it is in this moment that Hashem begins to describe to us the many and varied dimensions of prayer, for it is from the previously cited pesukim that we learn that "ze'oko", "sha'avo" and "na'oko" are types of prayer. Each of the ten formulae of prayer listed by Rabbi Yochanan (ibid) presumably reveal new facets of prayer. Both Malbim and Rav Hirsch, through different parallel studies, explain na'oko as a despairing prayer, one final gasping shot, if you will. Rav Hirsch continues to observe that the text teaches that Hashem accepted prayers that were not yet mouthed and responded to dangers with an urgency that we had not yet felt.
Rav Shimshon Pincus zt"l, in his classic work Shearim Betifila, explains that we present bakoshos - requests - in our prayers, but behind every request is a na'oko. For example, in our Shmone Esrei we list our bakashos for wisdom, health, parnosso, the ingathering of our people and our return to Yerushalyaim and we do not readily give expression to the na'ako.
We may simply ask for parnosso and that comprises our bakosho. Yet the underlying na'ako is the fear of foreclosure, the anxiety of having to borrow again, the embarrassment of meeting one's creditors, the fear that the next phone call is one of them, etc. Our bakoshos may ask to be blessed with family, while the unstated na'ako is the month by month disappointment, the tug every time one sees a friend's baby carriage, hears of a sholom zochor, or is part of a conversation about carpools. Our bakosho asks for a complete recovery and a life free of a nagging ailment, while the latent na'ako is to never have to see the young suffer and to be full of faith and free of questions and doubts.
In Mitzrayim we cried out from suffering that defied words, and that was our bakosho and ze'oko. Nevertheless, Hashem saw that anguish and heard as well the cry of a people whose lives had become seemingly meaningless, whose glorious legacy had been driven down to misery and emptiness. Whereas we, for the most part, were focused on surviving the day and could hardly feel pained by lost opportunities, Hashem saw the hollowness of an unfulfilled destiny and the crushing disappointment of the vacant dreams of his beloved Avrohom, Yitzchak and Yaakov.
Thus not only do we learn the fullness and uniqueness of Hashem's middah of Shomeah Tefillah from His response to Bnai Yisroel, but we also can try to enrich our own davening (whether we are the subject of the tefillah or others are) by focusing on the na'ako latent within every bakosho.