הלכות תפילה וברכת כהנים פרק י

Laws of Prayer Chapter 10 — Post-Facto Laws: Errors and Lack of Intention

Introduction: Ideal Practice to Post-Facto

Rabbi Yitzchak:

Gentlemen, we are learning the Laws, Book of Love, Laws of Prayer, Chapter 10.

Until now we have learned how to pray ideally (l’chatchila). Now we are going to learn what happens if a Jew made a mistake. There is always a new path, there is always what one must do next, one should not become lost.

Recap: Laws of Intention in Prayer (Chapter 4)

The Laws of Intention Ideally

Rabbi Yitzchak:

You have prayed. Earlier we learned that prayer requires intention (kavana). There are a few extra sections in the Rambam about what intention in prayer means. The minimum of this is that one should pray and not be busy with other things. And then the Rambam says, the intention exists that one should not have any thoughts at all, and one should be as if standing before the Divine Presence (Shechina).

So, we already spoke then with Rabbi Yitzchak about how far this can mean. And those who are stringent about intention say literally, one must the entire time remember that one stands before a King, it is a certain state of fear. But the minimum of this is that one should know that one is praying, one should not be busy literally with other things.

The Question: What Does “Did Not Direct His Heart” Mean in Chapter 10?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

When the Rambam says here “one who prayed and did not direct his heart,” one could further think, there the maximum is to pray after an hour, after settling oneself, finishing prayer with words of Torah, a section of laws which all means “directing one’s heart.” Here the Rambam says, if one prayed and was not directing his heart, what does he mean here? Was there zero intention, or was there not the full intention of what he speaks about there? It could be that for a tzaddik one can say, “did not direct his heart” means that there was not a complete prayer standing before the Divine Presence, he can pray an entire prayer over again, and it becomes again an obligatory prayer.

Rambam Chapter 4 Law 15: Definition of Intention

Rabbi Yitzchak:

There isn’t really stated in the Rambam such a level in intention, like you just made that up. In Chapter 4 Section 15 it states thus, “What is intention of the heart?” says the Rambam, “Any prayer that is not with intention is not prayer, and one who prays without intention must repeat and pray with intention”. Regarding this, if one’s mind is confused and his heart is troubled, he may not pray. And then he says further, “What is the intention? That he should clear his heart of all thoughts and see himself as if he is standing before the Divine Presence”. And then comes to this, “Therefore” one should enter the house of study standing, and one should not act as if rushing, and a drunk may not pray, and one may not pray in the midst of laughter, because one is not further, but rather from words of Torah. These are all the conditions in the laws of intention.

The Tzaddik’s Question: How Does “If He Directed His Heart in the First Blessing” Fit with the Laws of Intention?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

So if someone wants to learn this Rambam, and someone is a great tzaddik, a Jew named Rabbi Yitzchak Meir Morgenstern, he wants to pray 25 hours a day. He says thus, one must have the entire day a fearful high level of “entirely serving before the King,” a high level of exactly according to the decided law, settled mind. Every time in the middle of prayer I still did not have settled mind, I still have a mitzvah of praying.

He asked, and where does it say in Chapter 4 that there are levels of intention? I don’t say the word “levels of intention,” I say this is what intention means. I know, it doesn’t say there that there are levels. No, but I say, I didn’t say the word “levels.” I said, if intention means everything that the Rambam called intention, it means very much. Must a Jew repeat the Shemoneh Esrei if he sees that he did not pray with intention? Or conversely, if intention means only knowledge that he is praying, the opposite of being distracted, but seemingly, the Rambam said very clearly that intention means that he remembers that he is standing before the King.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Answer: Ideal Practice Versus Post-Facto

Rabbi Yitzchak:

So, it doesn’t say that there are levels. It says that one must have intention. And now one can learn it, you heard what one must do ideally. Now we are going to learn what one does post-facto. What happened? He prays. You have a situation where a Jew prays and he does not have intention. It happens sometimes. One must know what he should do afterwards. So the answer is, he should pray over again. That is the answer.

But the answer is at one blessing he had intention. According to the first… at the first, then he no longer needs to. He no longer needs to pray again.

Colleague:

If he no longer needs to, he no longer needs to have intention?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

If he no longer needs to, he doesn’t need to pray over. He can pray over again if he wants to pray a voluntary prayer, but he has already fulfilled his obligation of prayer.

Colleague:

One can always pray over if one makes a novelty.

Rabbi Yitzchak:

Why shouldn’t one say that everything that is prayer must be with intention?

Colleague:

And I said, there is a leniency of the first blessing. Now we’re speaking post-facto, Rabbi Yisrael.

Discussion: Is Praise, Thanksgiving, Request Indispensable in Prayer?

The Question: Why Is the First Blessing Enough?

Colleague:

Yes, but what is the matter that post-facto at least the first blessing? Why shouldn’t one say that the entire praise, prayer and thanksgiving, the entire order that the Rambam speaks of, is a Torah law?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

The Rambam says that it is a Torah law.

Colleague:

Perhaps one should say that a Jew who prayed three prayers without intention, only the first blessing, that at least once a day he should pray in a manner of praise, thanksgiving, request.

Rabbi Yitzchak:

You’re adding all the laws. All the laws, ideally one must have intention all prayers the entire time. But if a person did not have intention the entire time, if he had no intention at all, he prays over the entire thing. If he did have a little intention, then he has already fulfilled the intention.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Position: Intention Is Not Dependent on Content

Rabbi Yitzchak:

I think that this makes very much sense according to my approach, that the entire topic of truly having intention, you had earlier someone tell us that there are different types of parts of prayer, at least from Torah law, such as praise, thanksgiving, request. These are all nice details for whoever wants to pray according to the enactment of the Sages in a proper way. But the essential essence of prayer is to be, as it was said, “he should clear his heart from worldly matters and stand before the Divine Presence.” There is no difference what one says before the Divine Presence. These are all novelties. And by the way, one should ask with intention what is revelation of light before the Divine Presence. Very good. But the Rambam is consistent. Very good. There is no difference at all what one says. But the Rambam did say, when he said the law, the essential essence of the law of prayer is that one should say praise, thanksgiving, request.

Colleague:

I know, but that still means… You never found any source that this is indispensable in any way. I don’t know why you’re going to say it. I know that he says this, but that only means to bring out that there is a proper way how to pray. And consequently, otherwise the Men of the Great Assembly would not have needed to make an order, would not have made an order in the world. They made an order because there are indeed matters how it would be proper and correct to pray. But he never says that it is indispensable or anything like that. It’s not correct. It’s clear that the prayer from Torah law doesn’t need to have these conditions. I know that you like to say it, but I think it’s not correct.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Response: Praise, Thanksgiving, Request Is Only the Liturgy

Rabbi Yitzchak:

In any case, here is not the topic. Here is the topic of intention. Intention doesn’t mean that. Praise, thanksgiving, request is not a law in intention. It’s a law in the, how shall we say, in the organization of the liturgy, in the writing of it, in the art of it. The art of it goes thus. But intention has nothing to do with this. Intention is the pleasure of “as if the Divine Presence is before him,” which this calls. And in this thing there is no difference what one says.

Colleague:

So you hold that praise, thanksgiving, request is also only a condition in the liturgy?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

Certainly. Certainly.

Colleague:

No, this is how a person prays.

Rabbi Yitzchak:

I already told you, I know that you hold thus, but I don’t agree. Okay, so let’s see further in the later authorities, and we will see who will be described in our books. This is indeed a question of source in the Rambam on such types of things. But the law regarding it being indispensable, you see clearly that a short prayer doesn’t have the question of his needs and request etc., and it’s not indispensable.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Proof: Intention Is Not Dependent on the Content of the Words

Rabbi Yitzchak:

So, but what? I tell you a simple thing: if intention has nothing to do with what one says, in other words, from the aspect that it is indispensable that one should have intention, if one did not have intention at all in a prayer one day, one should pray over. But what means that it is indispensable from the aspect of intention? Intention doesn’t mean that one should know what one says, that one says “for the slanderers let there be no hope.” It means to say that one should be for a few seconds in the day standing before the Divine Presence. Already, you had a few seconds in the first blessing, you have already fulfilled, you can already go further.

Colleague:

Very good. But essentially, essentially, Torah also works thus. One must learn much Torah with intention, but the recitation of Shema one also fulfills with one verse.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Explanation: Intention Is a State, Not Content

Rabbi Yitzchak:

But the truth is, no, I say that intention, if you understand that intention has nothing to do with what one says, with the content, that the intention has to do with the totality of the intention, then you understand very well that “if he directed his heart in the first blessing.” And also “and salvation in the Targum” is the meaning, the simple meaning is the meaning not as the Rambam puts it in by the service, that “salvation in the Targum” is “to pray.” But also in the Gemara it is implied that one is not obligated to have intention more. In other words, what does intention mean? Intention means indeed that he clears his heart and he concentrates on the Divine Presence. So a person does it, he begins, in the end he forgets, at some point it falls away, as is the nature of things. Already, go further.

The Colleague’s Question: The First Blessing Is Only Praise, Not Prayer

Colleague:

Let’s say my way, when the prayer is as I said thus, the Rambam said that prayer that is not with intention… sorry, where am I? 4:16. So it states in the Gemara, “Prayer requires that he should direct his heart, and if he cannot direct his heart in all the prayers, he should direct his heart in one blessing.” “Any prayer that is not with intention is not prayer.” Very good. Here we also learn, yes, I said what forgetting intention means, that the other is not prayer. It’s not prayer. “If he directed his heart in the first blessing” is very difficult for me, because in the first blessing you have not yet fulfilled at all the mitzvah of prayer, you have only said praises to the Almighty.

So I would have been able to say thus, when I would not have learned in this Rambam prayer, one prayer, I would have said that he has the intentions of prayer from the first blessing, plus he said in practice all the words of the Sages. It seems there is somewhat a place to say the words.

That the Rambam says there prayer one prayer, if prayer one prayer is simply he only said the first blessing, and the first blessing at all is not… it is called prayer, it is indeed only praise to the Almighty.

Rabbi Yitzchak’s Response: Prayer Doesn’t Necessarily Mean Request of Needs

Rabbi Yitzchak:

Two things, I don’t agree with you here. First of all, taking away the thing that this must be praise, thanksgiving, request. But prayer means already all needs, you also don’t agree?

Colleague:

No, no, no, false. What means already your opinion prayer?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

Mercy with the Almighty, and bring us back to You.

Colleague:

Okay, according to Rabbi Yitzchak one doesn’t need all these things, one can have a bring us back to You. Certainly with the Almighty, but that only has to do with faith or another here.

Instead of that prayer which means request of needs, which the Rambam said what that is basic prayer. I ask you, how can one have request of needs attached in faith? I want to say that something must happen here that one uses the intention of the first blessing, but indeed is his saying something been worth.

Rabbi Yitzchak:

I don’t agree with all these things not. One fulfills prayer with the first blessing. But what you say… I know what you hold, when one makes assumptions, what he asks, where does it say in the Torah to make assumptions? He already asks questions. Please, don’t take a whole debate. He says indeed nothing about request of needs.

Colleague:

Okay, why doesn’t he say about request of needs?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

It’s not indispensable!

Colleague:

I know what you said. It’s not acceptable at all. It’s not acceptable at all.

End of Discussion: What Does Prayer Mean?

Rabbi Yitzchak:

What does prayer mean? What means not acceptable? It’s as if someone should say that learning Torah is not acceptable in reading the Torah. Prayer means… what does prayer mean? According to you, briefly, according to your assumption, according to your assumption you say that prayer means this. And according to the simple meaning of prayer means any of these things, and a little one fulfills. With the Rabbis one must say the whole. Now listen. A blessing, a blessing, a blessing is a prayer, a blessing is a prayer.

Laws of Prayer – Intention in Prayer and Error in Prayer

Law of Prayer: Request of Needs and Intention

Speaker 1: There is a law of prayer, which means request of needs, which is what the Rambam said that this is basic prayer. The question arises, how can one have request of needs with Shield of Abraham? I want to say that something must happen here that one uses the intention of the first blessings, but indeed is your saying something been worth.

Speaker 2: I don’t agree with you, you say that one fulfills prayer with the first blessing. But what you say, I know when you hold, when you hold by making assumptions, you ask at length, you present yourself, you make yourself assumptions, you already ask no questions. Please don’t take a whole week. He says nothing at all about request of needs. Okay, what do you say about request of needs? It’s not indispensable. Who told you that it’s indispensable? It’s not indispensable at all. That is prayer. What means it’s not indispensable? It’s as if someone should say that learning Torah is not indispensable by reading the Torah. You said that prayer means, according to perhaps, supplication, such a language. According to your assumption, what does prayer mean? And he leads you, simple simple meaning prayer means any of these things, and with a little one fulfills. Rabbinically one must say the whole.

Position of the Magen Avraham Regarding Women

Speaker 1: Now listen, certainly, certainly this is like the holy Magen Avraham. Not I say thus, the Magen Avraham says thus, he rules the law thus regarding women. That according to his approach that they are only obligated from Torah law prayer, not rabbinically, they fulfill with a request of any matter, he says in Magen Avraham, with any blessing. So, wise one, we can hear the Magen Avraham. So the Rambam here also must have gone with approximately this approach of Magen Avraham. But one must think why the first blessing of Shemoneh Esrei is then more important than saying simply Shehakol. I tell you, the simple simple meaning is because it’s easier, when one begins with an intention, and later one loses it. When he says prayer without intention like a body without a soul, he means that you should not deceive yourself, you have already made enough intention, okay, now let it go.

Simple Meaning in “Prayed Without Intention Must Repeat and Pray”

Speaker 2: Now, what you are right, that it’s not literally the prayer of one with one intention. It doesn’t mean that the words that one says without intention don’t count. What is the proof? For example, if you go learn the laws of slaughter that should not go up and down, there is no law of slaughter that should not go up and down with intention. The law was said, all these laws that you go learn, the lesson is the fourth, he said the words without intention. It’s clear that the mitzvah rabbinically of prayer is not the intention, the mitzvah of saying all these words. And if one says it, even if one said without intention, one has also fulfilled. And every prayer one must have at least a little intention.

Speaker 1: But I want to look at this Rambam a little differently and say thus: a person prays and he catches himself that he did not have any intention. What is “prayed without intention”? It means from now he must exert himself very much to pray with intention. The Rambam says further, “And if he directed in the first blessing, he no longer needs to”. He no longer needs to exert himself for the further blessings. But “one who did not pray,” he finished praying, he must now go back to begin praying. Why? Because here it matters when a person is in the middle.

Speaker 2: That means, you want to say that he must further not have in mind?

Speaker 1: Yes, but in the middle of praying, if he did not have intention in the first blessing, he must go back. He must go back to the beginning.

Lecture on Prayer Laws: Intention (Kavana), Errors in Prayer, and Related Halachot

Discussion on Kavana (Intention) in the First Blessing

Speaker 2: But I don’t understand the whole problem. If he needs to go back to the beginning because he needs to pray the beginning of the Shemoneh Esrei, but it’s enough later that he has in mind the first blessing, and he can then repeat the words.

Speaker 1: The interesting thing is, why did they need to place such a blessing like Magen Avraham at the end of Shemoneh Esrei? When a person catches himself at the end that he didn’t have it in mind. The reason why he needs to have more kavana in the first blessing is because it’s the first blessing, because it’s the beginning of the blessing. And if not, one cannot place the first at the end, because the end is the last.

Speaker 2: The person prayed, and they tell him that he should only have in mind the first blessing, but he should then say the entire Shemoneh Esrei. But the saying he already did once. One only needs to overcome to have kavana. Why shouldn’t they tell him he should say the first blessing?

Analogy: Kavana is Like “Plugging In” the Prayer

Speaker 1: A prayer without any kavana… let’s see, the first little bits…

Speaker 2: Yes, very good. One needs to plug in. The kavana plugs in the prayer. You plug it in, you start it. The moment it’s plugged in, the rest connects itself. But you need to plug in a prayer.

Speaker 1: No, I mean seriously, a simple thing, think about it. The kavana is like they say “standing before the Divine Presence.” You are standing before the Divine Presence, and then comes in the text of its body. How does the address of the prayer come? A fax comes from the memories, it comes in. The Almighty hears. But without kavana it doesn’t start at all.

L’chatchila and B’dieved – No Contradiction in the Rambam

Speaker 2: Now, I’ll tell you what you like to say, a very good question for a Torah lesson. Let’s see further. Until here, this is until here the laws of kavana. But this also says a lot more about the investigation we have. But let’s see further. All the laws of prayer, let’s start right away. All the laws of prayer, one can go further until the laws of kavana, and until the laws of one who erred b’dieved there is no kavana. This means that the whole contradiction which is known that it says earlier that one needs kavana, is not a contradiction at all, because here it speaks b’dieved, there it speaks l’chatchila. I don’t understand the whole question.

Tefillat Nedava as an Option

Speaker 1: But they also say that one needs to distinguish between what they learned now and the next laws. Because here, if a person prayed without kavana, apparently the simple meaning is that it’s not a good prayer. Here we’re going to learn about a person where apparently it’s a matter of a penalty.

Speaker 2: No, a person didn’t pray properly, he didn’t pray as it was arranged that one should pray an order, or one should say certain prayers on the days, and one didn’t…

Speaker 1: One minute, one minute. One can go further, we’re not talking about kavana. We’re talking about errors, he said the wrong words. Presumably the truth is that when he says the wrong words he wasn’t concentrating, but that’s not stated. Every error is also a matter that he needs to pray again.

Speaker 2: He should return and pray. This is apparently for a different reason. It’s not because the prayer wasn’t a good prayer, because kavana is lacking. The prayer itself is lacking.

Speaker 1: A penalty is an obligation, that’s how one must say. A penalty is a punishment. It’s not a punishment. The obligation was indeed that one should say in order, the correct way, according to the parameters that we’re now going to learn. If you did wrong, you haven’t yet fulfilled today’s law. The law is that it should be a beautiful prayer, it should be worked out. It’s not a penalty. People might think it’s a punishment, but it’s not a punishment. It’s not that he made an error and forgot the law, so it’s a punishment. On the contrary, it’s a merit. A Jew, they give him another chance. It’s like “the first time is beautiful.” Now say it correctly.

Speaker 2: One really needs to look at it many times that the person has anyway the choice to make a tefillat nedava. When they tell him “sit and you don’t need to,” they mean to say that you’re not the person who wants to pray. Someone who wants to pray, he makes tefillat nedavot. For him it was fulfilled with the first blessing. It doesn’t always automatically mean that if you say it now it will be a blessing in vain. I have a place for tefillat nedava. If someone wants to be a tzaddik and pray and pray until he has the entire prayer with kavana, I don’t know. It could be, but these aren’t our laws. This is what one needs, what one wants to do. They tell him it’s already not a good prayer and do what he wants. I already know Pesach and I don’t have a dwelling.

Speaker 1: Someone doesn’t agree. But I don’t have an obligation here. An obligation is only the first blessing. That’s not stated. But there is a place for this. There is a place for many things. Because the Rambam has high expectations of kavana. Here is the minimum. Yes, I have a greater need. I know why you’re saying this. He doesn’t say kavana at all. Not my need. We see we need to be careful. Mine is my obligation. They don’t say again. It’s not my obligation. If you want to do what you want, you can do what you want. But the Rambam doesn’t have my expectations and he’s the opposite. Since he knows that kavana is a beautiful thing, he says it’s realistic. The first blessing is enough. This is for him with the different servant beginning. But servant means, he reckons with reality. But there is a body of Shemoneh Esrei but it’s no good, because it doesn’t have a head. It needs to put on a new head so it can function.

Speaker 2: No, I didn’t mean on such a level. But it’s only an analogy, the tomorrow is only an analogy. But because an analogy fits with the word? I don’t mean… take the form, yes.

Speaker 1: But who interprets it that way?

Speaker 2: Yes, but I don’t mean that way. Do you know who interprets it that way over there? I know, yes. But I don’t mean that way. I mean it makes sense that way. I don’t mean it’s a magic trick.

Speaker 1: Okay, but we need to go further.

Laws of Errors in Prayer

What Does “Erred” Mean?

Speaker 2: Now we’re going to learn, and it should say what is the error. I already know what an error is, but say why it’s stated.

Speaker 1: Okay, someone already erred. The translation of “erred” means that one simply got confused, he doesn’t know where he’s holding. He’s holding in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei. He knows he’s standing in the middle and holding in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei. He has no idea where he’s holding. If he remembers that he already said that he’s holding between this blessing and the first blessing. No, no, complete doubt. A complete translation of doubt, as they thought in the question, question, that there are things.

Speaker 2: I think “erred” means that he made an error. What error did he make? I think it means he forgot a piece… No, error means he made an error, a mistake.

Speaker 1: Error means he didn’t say every word, apparently. Something he did wrong. I don’t know what he did wrong exactly. And we would want to know which it is… Perhaps it means one of the errors that we’ll soon see which is me’akev, that he won’t say “causing the dew to fall,” such sorts of things. Because otherwise one needs to know, is every word me’akev? Apparently not every word is me’akev anyway, so…

Speaker 2: It could be error means that he said one of the things as we calculated. He said “a kedusha in anger,” or he said “Modim Modim,” or he didn’t say “Ya’aleh V’yavo.” This I understand, not saying “Ya’aleh V’yavo” is such a thing.

Speaker 1: Fine, he spoke earlier about kavana, and here he says if one prayed without kavana, and now he says… one was indeed erring. Not like all these laws that one shouldn’t err, but he did err. But which error exactly is what I want to know, which error is being discussed. Some error that is me’akev, that’s how it must be.

Speaker 2: It’s difficult, if one will say that it’s only an error in the text of the prayer, I say indeed, I argue the whole time that this is not the main matter.

Speaker 1: Very good, so whatever prayer that is me’akev… You have right away a few words. But like a cantor who says a few verses, he doesn’t need to repeat. Because there it says in the commentators that one is enough, but he didn’t say “causing the rain to fall,” something that is indeed me’akev.

Speaker 2: But about this we already said that we’re going to learn, it’s clear. But we already said… Okay, it could be I’ll… Okay, so…

Law: Erred in the First, Middle, or Last Blessings

Speaker 1: “And if he erred in one of the three first blessings, he returns to the beginning. And if he erred in one of the three last blessings…” In the last ones there’s also what needs Ya’aleh V’yavo.

Speaker 2: Yes. And Al HaNissim. But say the law clearly. What is the law?

Speaker 1: Yes. What is the law that he erred in one of the first three blessings, one starts again. Because apparently he didn’t mean, for example, “The Holy King” he said earlier, or “causing the wind to blow.”

Speaker 2: “If he erred in one of the three last blessings,” for example he didn’t say Ya’aleh V’yavo or whatever there isn’t relevant, one starts… one goes back to Avodah, one goes back to the three last blessings, to the blessing of Avodah. “If he erred in one of the middle ones,” for example he catches himself at “Bless upon us,” he doesn’t need to go back until… after Go’el Yisrael, until “Heal us” and “See our affliction”… No, not even. Not even. He doesn’t need to go back to the blessing upon us existence. If he erred in one of them he returns, says the Rambam, what must he do? He needs to go back to where he’s holding. Returns, he goes back to where he’s holding. Returns to the beginning of the blessing in which he erred. He doesn’t need to go back to “our eyes shall see and our heart shall rejoice,” or whatever, I mean to say what the first blessing is, “our eyes shall see and our heart shall rejoice.” He caught himself at “who creates the fruit of the ground.”

Laws of Errors in Prayer: Middle Blessings, Cantor Who Erred, and Blessing Against Heretics

Law 1 (continued): Erred in One of the Middle Blessings

Speaker 1:

The middle blessings are not a set that one needs to go back to. Erred in one of the middle ones, says the Rambam, what must he do? He needs to go back to the prayer where he’s holding. Returns, he goes to where he’s holding. Returns to the beginning of the blessing in which he erred. He doesn’t need to go back to “See our affliction,” or I mean to say what is the kal v’chomer here, “See our affliction,” he caught himself at “Blessed are You” that he erred, he doesn’t need to go back to the beginning of the middle blessings, as that one had to go back to the first, meaning “You graciously endow,” which is the first of the middle blessings, but he needs to go back to where? He needs to go back to the blessing where he erred, to the error. And because his prayer must be in order, he goes back to where the last time before he erred, and he goes from there and further. Very good. This is the Rambam of blessed memory, although there are other Rishonim who held differently.

Discussion: Why Aren’t the Middle Blessings One Package?

Speaker 1:

Apparently, it’s very interesting, why aren’t the middle blessings called a package? The praise of the Almighty is a package, the thanking of the Almighty is a package, your needs are a bunch of separate bags? Yes, it’s not one package. Yes, interesting. It’s like one, it doesn’t make sense all these laws of errors, the simple meaning is, a prayer needs to come out well. You make a prayer and you start in the middle of “You are holy,” it doesn’t make sense. It’s all one matter, it’s one matter, it’s all smeared on the Almighty’s vessels, it’s all we’re saying. But a form you’ve only laid out today one package.

On the other hand, the Rambam says yes that one needs to say his prayer in order, that means he can’t say the blessings not in order. If he made an error in “See our affliction,” he can’t say this randomly between Shema and prayer and the seven sevens, but he must go back and he repeats peace and so on. Yes, because of the requirement he says in order. He goes yes, in a certain sense there is indeed blessings in order in the middle blessings, because he needs to repeat again also the verses that he already said, it depends where he erred, also the blessings. In this sense the Rambam holds that there is indeed an order. There is a sharp dispute among the Rishonim, there are those who learned that one can even generally switch the order. But the Rambam learned that one really can’t, the Gemara says to arrange, the Rambam understood to arrange. Means only to say that one doesn’t need to go all the way to the beginning of the middle blessings, but one must indeed complete the prayer in order, meaning from the blessing that is good, so say all the commentators here. Okay. The order of blessings is indeed me’akev to that extent.

Yes, there are like two levels of how much the order of blessings is me’akev. To the extent that one needs to start again from the beginning, or at least to the extent that from that order one needs to go further in order. Yes, meaning one can’t switch l’chatchila, meaning l’chatchila, one can’t switch the order, one can’t say the wrong way, the wrong order of the blessings.

Law 2: Cantor Who Erred

Speaker 1:

Right. And so, this is when an individual prays. The same thing a cantor who erred when praying aloud, he returns, also he needs to go back, says the Rambam. This is the same thing, if he makes an error in the three first ones he goes back to the beginning, which is the aspect… Yes, he returns. Even though it holds up the congregation, but apparently it’s also a part, because if not the congregational prayer wouldn’t be valid, it would be a… It’s even worse perhaps than an individual, because it’s like it brings errors.

But, says the Rambam, but if the cantor erred when praying silently, I say, says the Rambam his innovation, that he doesn’t need to pray silently. We learned earlier that the cantor although he’s going to say aloud Shemoneh Esrei again and fulfill the obligation of the congregation, he also prays the silent prayer. And Rabbi Yitzchak said from somewhere that the Rambam says that the Gemara says that it’s so that he should be fluent in his tongue in praying. But the Rambam said no, he didn’t ask.

Speaker 2:

That he prays Shemoneh Esrei again, I don’t remember that he clearly said that so that he should be fluent in his tongue. I don’t know.

Speaker 1:

So in practice by his silent prayer that he erred, and he wants to now position himself again, if he’s now going to position himself again he’s going to delay the congregation. Says the Rambam, my law is, I learn that he shouldn’t position himself to pray silently again, but he fulfills his obligation with what he prays with the congregational prayer aloud. And he needs but yes… Yes, line, line, line.

And he, says the Rambam conditionally, and he who stipulates in his heart returns… he doesn’t return, the individual cantor doesn’t return and pray silently a second time for the burden of the congregation, one needs to wait twice he should finish twice Shemoneh Esrei. He should say again the silent prayer, and again the prayer aloud. And this is the matter of the prayer aloud that was established to fulfill the obligation of one who is not expert, but this is the prayer that the prayer leader prays aloud, he must indeed return. This is the simple meaning. He says that what it says that he doesn’t need to return, is exactly like an individual. This is discussed in the repetition of the prayer, not in his silent prayer, because his silent prayer he’s going to say again anyway. This is the simple meaning that he argues. Very good.

Law 3: Cantor Who Erred and Became Confused

Speaker 1:

He says further: A cantor who erred and became confused, the cantor erred and now he’s lost, he no longer remembers where he’s holding. And didn’t know from where to begin, he doesn’t know where to start, and this lasted a long time. A prayer leader who paused for an hour, one needs to know what an hour is, the Rambam means a certain hour, or a large amount of time. The simple meaning is that he’s not expert as a prayer leader, another should stand in his place, another should start from the beginning apparently. Why something from the beginning? From where? He’s going to say, he’s going to say. Law 4 is going to say from where to begin. Ah, another should stand in his place. Very good.

In a simple blessing, the cantor starts a blessing and he stutters, he doesn’t know what’s the next piece, he can’t catch himself, one waits one takes an hour’s time.

Speaker 2:

A whole hour?

Speaker 1:

You ask a good question. And you send for a second one. He can’t, send a second one. But this is only if he hasn’t started yet, if the prayer leader hasn’t started yet and you want to send him, then you don’t let him, if you see that he’s not worthy to be a prayer leader. That’s not stated here. But if the prayer leader has begun, we wait for him an hour until he finishes. Okay, he came a little bit.

Birkat HaMinim

Speaker 1:

If he erred in Birkat HaMinim, look what he says here. What happens if the prayer leader made a mistake specifically at Birkat HaMinim, “V’lamalshinim”, the Samech-Gimmel doesn’t come out of his mouth? Then we don’t wait for him, we remove him immediately, lest heresy has been cast into him. Suddenly you’re stuck at “V’lamalshinim”? At “Al HaTzadikim” you shout loudly, but “V’lamalshinim” you can’t? The Rambam, as they should only begin with “V’lamalshinim”. If they didn’t begin with “V’lamalshinim”, but they began with “Laminim”. “V’lamalshinim” was added later.

Speaker 2:

Yes, he goes up to “V’lamalshinim”. You’re afraid because you’re afraid that it will happen by itself.

Speaker 1:

But it’s very interesting, we have here the third way how a person can show people bad signals that there is heresy cast into him.

Discussion: Three Ways of Signs of Heresy

Speaker 2:

What other ways have we already had?

Speaker 1:

Ah, the previous thing. He says… but it’s not heresy cast into him. There it was “Modim Modim”.

Speaker 2:

Okay, “Modim Modim” is perhaps more powerful. I don’t know if there were actually heretics who used to say “Modim Modim”. Could be. Okay, I don’t know.

Speaker 1:

But for example the “Ya’al kach tzipor” is not because it’s heresy, but because he didn’t hold from the prayer. There wasn’t a concern that it’s heresy.

Speaker 2:

No, it’s just a crooked worldview.

Speaker 1:

And the Lipper Sheyner said that a crooked worldview is heresy. Very good, but it doesn’t say that we remove him. There it says that we silence him, yes?

Speaker 2:

No, not silence. We just make, he goes back to the normal Jewish nusach.

Speaker 1:

Here we send him away. Yes, blessing instead, yes.

Discussion: “V’lo Yeha Sarvan” – The Embarrassment and the Necessity

Speaker 1:

But here there is a law. It says in the Rambam “and he should not make refusers in the house of Israel”. When we now ask that someone should quickly go take over, a crisis is created in shul. It’s an embarrassment, yes. The children there are biting their lips that their father has somehow become heresy cast into him. The second one should quickly run to take over. The Rambam already said that we send someone to, he shouldn’t send him.

Speaker 2:

No, the Mishnah, the Hagahot Maimoniyot also. It’s all a Mishnah, and here we became equal that normally yes. It doesn’t say that we should. If it happens, a person, I don’t know if it says that we should. Until now we haven’t seen that we should.

Speaker 1:

No, we haven’t learned. No, not learned that we should. On the contrary, we learned that there is a permanent shaliach tzibur. Things are said here, we don’t say any humility. You have to be the next person, be someone who works with. Don’t be any boastful person.

He brings the Rabbeinu Manoach, he has the same thing. He says, you see from here that usually it’s nicer to say. He says, just as we find from Moshe Rabbeinu, he said “Shlach na b’yad tishlach”, Yosef HaTzadik said “V’he’elitem et atzmotai mizeh”. It depends if he wants, if he doesn’t chase.

So, if he goes, we send him to the congregation, he’s already disgusted. It doesn’t help, because then the other one doesn’t let himself. The other one refuses and we ask him again.

But it’s interesting to me, we see here like something else. The Mishnah says like this, as if every shul needs to have the regular one who knows quickly when to come, because someone caught some kind of heresy that’s not good, even if it’s perhaps a small inconvenience, ah, the gabbai is up, he should quickly prepare and continue davening. But it’s nice, the congregation is waiting, I have a congregation, the congregation is waiting, I’ll need to… It’s a wisdom with a great embarrassment.

Speaker 2:

But you added that. The simple meaning says that the congregation just needs one person. There are different congregations, there should be no refuser in this city. But the practical difference from this is, that in a small shul like where I daven, or you perhaps, I don’t know, when we send someone usually, it’s not dishonoring him usually, because we need him. So to be a refuser is not any matter of humility, it’s plain… plain badness at that point.

Speaker 1:

I’ll tell you what a refuser is. A refuser is similar to the law in Hilchot Talmud Torah, that a student shouldn’t seek to say things in front of the rabbis or further. Everyone should be humble. But if there’s a desecration of God’s name, something happened, you need to quickly know when to jump up, when you need to have yourself.

But I think the simple meaning is like the disgusted one, is when there’s time for it. There’s no time, we’re not asking you for honor. The humility is, we’re giving you a great honor to be a prayer leader. Okay, who says? It’s for me, it’s not appropriate to go grab. But this is not honor. Now it’s simple, we’re standing here in the middle without a prayer leader, go quickly.

But it’s even more than that, it’s also Birkat HaMinim. It shouldn’t now become understood that in that shul they don’t say Birkat HaMinim properly, because it took time, we looked for someone to take over. Quickly say Birkat HaMinim, we all united.

Speaker 2:

Okay, I agree. I already know what you’re getting into problems, that by one person it’s disgusting.

Speaker 1:

No, the Mishnah says there should be no refuser in this city, it goes up to always when the prayer leader errs and falls, but we only have here when it goes another descends in his place.

Speaker 2:

No, when every another descends in his place.

Speaker 1:

Ah, could be.

But therefore, when there is… I’ll tell you more, there’s even more, everyone understands that it’s not a matter of honor, it’s more a matter that you need to have yourself, you shouldn’t be a refuser.

Speaker 2:

No, I wanted to say that it’s humility, you won’t find him in a parking lot, he’ll let you go before him, he’ll give in, he doesn’t seek to be a prayer leader, he doesn’t seek to use himself, everyone is humble. It’s not humility, it’s a point.

Speaker 1:

I’m only a rabbi in my shul, because of the law of so there shouldn’t be a refuser. The Rambam brings down a story in Hilchot Mikvaot

Laws of Errors in Prayer: From Where Does the Second One Begin, Who Doesn’t Pass Before the Ark, and Doubt if He Prayed

Law 3: Another Shall Stand in His Place

Speaker 1:

No, by every “another shall stand in his place” they have… ah, could be. Yes. When it’s… I’ll say more, I’ll say more, every time when it’s not a topic of honor, it’s more a topic that you need yourself, there shouldn’t be a refuser.

Um… no, people today are a prophet. You’ll find yourself in a parking lot these days, looking for someone for Mincha, afterwards looking for a prayer leader for twenty minutes, because everyone is humble. It’s not a prophet, it’s just the opposite. I’m only a rabbi in my shul because of the law of “so he shouldn’t refuse”.

Birkat HaMinim: “The Hat Burns on the Thief”

The Rambam further, “from where does he begin?” Um… I really understand the heretic who is afraid to say Birkat HaMinim. Let him say Birkat HaMinim, we’ll see that that one is the heretic himself. It’s just not the wisdom of the heretics then that came to mind. This is splitting hairs, you can’t. No, a heretic… this is a measure of how much you can set up. This is really like “the hat burns on the thief”. A certain heretic… but it doesn’t say about a certain heretic, it says “the one who directly has the heretics”. Only the life, he means the second one. Not everyone has so much heresy cast into him. Such sophistication. No, this is really a “the hat burns on the thief” situation. This is like the candle should go out from the mikvah, he surely becomes impure the candle. Ah, you really know a candle. It’s very funny.

Or as you say, it clearly means one person. It’s already foolishness cast into him. For some reason a second one needs to take over the speech.

You know, it seems that Birkat HaMinim today is no longer relevant about this, but once it was clearly known whom it meant. It wasn’t some doubt what the heretics in the Gemara…

Law 4: From Where Does He Begin?

Okay, “from where does he begin?” So, what does the second one who comes do, what does he do? From where does he start? He goes back to the same law. Because here it explains a bit what the Rambam learned earlier that a prayer leader must be a Torah scholar, because you see what can come out of a non-Torah scholar who stands to pray, all these errors. You see here the place.

“From where does he begin? From the beginning of the blessing in which the first one erred.” And today we have our siddurim. Presumably there wasn’t such a big problem because there weren’t siddurim. The prayer leader presumably did have a siddur. No, the Rambam says in the Gemara not. The Rambam says yes, by the law of the Gemara there were no siddurim at all. And you really had to remember. Today such a person makes like a melody, yes, he forgot, he can’t. Yes, it’s really talking about this. It’s really a question. He doesn’t remember how he is “anu bonenu” etc., and no one remembers to tell him, because he wouldn’t God forbid have been able to get such a good one.

But well, who knows? No, it’s… let’s make him a question. When someone takes over, yes, when someone takes over, it’s understandable that he needs to make a blessing. It goes with the same laws from all the other laws. It goes without a blessing. If he started in the middle, he continues and he goes over from the beginning of that blessing. If it’s one of the…

Another law of someone who we don’t let go to the lectern. This is an interesting law. There are more laws, for example, when there is a certain set of blessings, if you didn’t say according to the set, for example Sheva Brachot, there is a law that the order is not essential. Fine, also in Birkot Kriat Shema we learned explicitly that the order is not essential. So, I don’t know. But by the blessing of Tefillat Shemoneh Esreh the order is essential. Yes.

Law 5: One Who Says “I Will Not Descend Before the Ark in Colored Garments”

Yes, says the Torah, now we’re going to learn another one who we don’t send at all. There’s one who doesn’t want to say Birkat HaMinim we throw out, or we know in advance that he won’t say it, certainly we don’t send him. But it seems to me that there’s another new person who we don’t let out. Yes? One who says, “I will not descend before the ark in colored garments, because my garments are colored”. Yes, a Jew comes into the beit midrash, and we ask him, the gabbai says, “Perhaps you’ll go to the lectern?” He says, “I can’t, because my garments are colored”, because my clothes are colored.

There’s an interesting law, pay attention, the law is that the person may no longer go to the lectern, even when he already puts on white clothes. “Even in white ones he shall not descend in that prayer”. In that prayer. That means, he goes away, he comes back with a kittel. Yes. It’s interesting, because at Shacharit prayer this happens a lot. A person says, “I have a bekeshe, I have a black bekeshe”. I’m not even talking about that. Yes, but the matter here is, I thought that it’s a matter because he’s not dressed modestly, he’s not dressed nicely. Like the Rema said earlier that there’s a matter of a tallit, you should put on a tallit. You should be like the one who had ashes on his loins, but here there’s some matter, that as we say certain commentators, that there were certain idol worshippers who didn’t pray if they had color, you were only allowed to pray with white clothes. I think the Muslims are like that, no? The Muslims put on all white when they go to pray. There was… I don’t know, perhaps that means heretics. Heretics perhaps means like he says idol worshippers. Perhaps heretic Jews, or the Jews made themselves like the gentiles. Perhaps it’s such a situation. In short, the Sages silence there.

Simple Meaning: This is a Sign of Heresy

No, because a person can indeed think that when a person tells him you can’t pray like that because you don’t have your kittel, it’s a concern and he should be afraid. No, no, because he says here, because an individual person may pray even with a black bekeshe, he says such a language, “and the Sages did not agree”. No, no, it’s not. There is a law, this is a law that was taken back.

The simple meaning is simple. There was… this is a nullified law, it’s not a law that’s relevant today in our time on idol worship. No, it was in the times of the Sages, of the Mishnah. This is a Mishnah, a Mishnah in Megillah. In the time of the Mishnah there were some people, such a group of Essenes. I don’t know, go ask Yosef who were the disappeared people exactly. They had a craziness, for whatever reason, doesn’t matter to me why, they only pray with white clothes. And the people, we don’t hold from those people. Why not? Because they’re heretics, they want to start some group. It’s one of their signs, such a kind of craziness. It’s just a sign, it’s just a sign, it’s just a sign. But the custom, you wear a kittel, you wear a kittel, that’s not the question. It’s such a type of person who… we tell him, we need our free ones, and according to the law you can go either in colored or in white, it doesn’t matter, it’s not a sin either way. But the one who revealed that he’s particular about this craziness, the simple meaning is he’s not from ours.

Parable: The Litvak and the Gartel

Like, imagine, I’ll tell you a parable that makes sense. Imagine that there’s a Litvak who carries the excommunication of the Vilna Gaon on the Chassidim, okay? The parable doesn’t fit so well, but imagine a Jew comes into the beit midrash, and he says, “The maggid, lend me, I need my gartel.” He says no, I don’t need to pray like that, because you’re a Chassid, you’re in the known sect that’s in excommunication. Why does he know he’s in excommunication? Because he goes with a gartel. Only you’re particular to go with a gartel, not that you’re not allowed to go with a gartel. The Litvak agrees that you may go with a gartel, or perhaps it’s even a beautification to go with a gartel. But if he’s so particular, in the manner of a Chassid, he’s in excommunication.

One Who Says “I Will Not Pass in Shoe and Sandal”

The next thing is the same thing, “one who says I will not pass before the ark in shoe and sandal”, I won’t go to the lectern with shoe and sandal, I have shoes, and I need to go without shoes. And he brings that the Chatam Sofer says that other peoples had the stringency that you may only pray barefoot. So “he too shall not pass”, because he’s more particular than the custom of Israel or more than the enactment of the Sages. The Gemara already says, there’s one way of filtering the beit midrash through Birkat HaMinim, and there’s another way of saying that you may go dressed however you want, not to say that you should dress differently.

The Rambam: “One Who is Embarrassed in Prayer Shall Not Pass”

And the Rambam doesn’t understand, the Rambam says in the tenth chapter that “one who is embarrassed in prayer shall not pass”, tomorrow perhaps he did repentance and he became an apostate. Reb Yosef, he just says a note, you have a house with sons-in-law, and he’ll tell you, “Dad, may you pray Yom Kippur with a black vest? I forgot my tallit, I didn’t put it in my bag.” You need to remember to say that you may, because the Rambam says that “he too shall not pass”, because it lacks this law, the Almighty accepts all prayers. But today the custom is that all Jews go with a white garment. But this already has to do, the subject of the law is not now. True, because he says that it’s only when there are historical things, but it also lies here the law that when a person says I want to go dressed differently, and also by the lineage, when a person wants to act more pious than is accepted in the shul, it’s not a good thing.

Story with Reb Leibush from Antwerp

And I wanted to add, I barely found anyone who should be a moreh hora’ah (halachic decisor), the holy Rebbe Reb Leibush from Antwerp, he can tell, when he sees people walking with a black gartel (belt) on their kittel (white robe), he knows from afar that someone should put the kittel on the gartel, or he should wear a white gartel. There is a hekpedah (stringency), I don’t know exactly from which places, because something in certain religions they go with white clothing with a black gartel on it. But that’s not… But that’s not the point here. I understand that this means that it’s a symbol in that sort of religion. One can learn from here that the simple meaning is you are a Jew, which the Rambam perhaps learned this way. Therefore the Rambam says “nohagot hatfilah” (customs of prayer). The Ra’avad asks, he doesn’t understand what is this “nohagot hatfilah”. If he is a min (heretic), tomorrow he can already become an apikoros (heretic) and he is a min. It could be the Rambam learned as you say, that it’s more like a sort of thing that Jews specifically don’t do it because the gentiles do it. So tomorrow, he did teshuvah (repentance), it’s a small sin. I don’t know. Interesting.

Return to the Topic of To’eh (One Who Errs)

Okay, now we’re going back to our topic of to’eh. This only came in here because it was the question of to’eh. But Chazal (our Sages) already said this through with another one that we don’t send. And this thing could still be put together with the one who says “Modim Modim”, it’s similar to that one too. In the Mishnah it’s only, yes. But there it didn’t look so much like a yored lifnei hateivah (one who goes before the ark). Here we’re talking literally about a yored lifnei hateivah. The one who says “Modim Modim” he just does it like that.

Discussion: How is “Modim Modim” Relevant During Punishment?

Speaker 2:

Yes, but how is this relevant during punishment? Certainly it’s talking about a shaliach tzibbur (prayer leader).

Speaker 1:

True, the friend is right, but it could be that the saying is not a good thing because he doesn’t understand well what the essence of Torah is. Ah, it turns on our previous dispute. You’re right that the halachah there is also for an individual, but during punishment, apparently your answer.

Okay, we need to move here. It was just an idea to say. Okay. The Rambam there says that it’s talking about tachanun (supplications), which apparently perhaps this is only said by an individual, I don’t know. Now back to the halachah here. Let me read a bit, I need to move a bit. Yes, sorry, we’re holding here.

Halachah 6: Doubt Whether One Prayed

Now, there was a Jew, as such a thing happens, an interesting thing, he doesn’t know if he davened (prayed). If he were a Chassidic Jew, he could go to a Rebbe to ask. The Rebbe sees if he davened, the Rebbe can sense you. But sometimes this wasn’t there, so consequently he needs to know the halachah. Shalom, you’re already here, you learn very quickly. Rather, if a person is in doubt whether he davened or not, he repeats the prayer. Apparently one repeats the prayer, why tefillah berabim (prayer in public)? After all, the rabim (public) is the community. Unless he may pray as a nedavah (voluntary offering), he may pray over if he doesn’t remember, because “I heard that one who wants to pray every day a tefillat nedavah, may pray”, a person can daven as many nedavot as he wants, rather during the week, on Shabbat we saw that there are Geonim who don’t allow it, but during the week certainly. Consequently he can, but he doesn’t have to.

Question: Why Doesn’t He Have To?

What’s wrong? Why doesn’t he have to? Apparently there is a safek derabbanan (rabbinic doubt).

Laws of Errors in Prayer: Doubt if He Prayed, Remembered in the Middle, and Prayed Weekday on Shabbat

Halachah 6: Doubt if He Prayed — He Does Not Repeat the Prayer

Is he in doubt whether he davened or not? So chozer ve’im eino chozer umitpalel (he returns and if he doesn’t return and pray). The halachah is eino chozer umitpalel (he does not return and pray). Why? Because prayer is derabbanan (rabbinically mandated), and safek derabbanan (rabbinic doubt) is lenient.

Unless he may pray this prayer as a nedavah. He may pray over if he doesn’t remember, because perhaps the individual wants to pray all day tefillat nedavah, he may pray. A person can daven as many nedavot as he wants, in any case during the week. On Shabbat we saw that there are Geonim who don’t allow it, but during the week certainly. Consequently he can, but he doesn’t have to.

Question: Why Doesn’t He Have To?

What’s wrong? Why doesn’t he have to? Apparently what is the safek derabbanan? Safek derabbanan about what? Safek derabbanan, yes. We saw, prayer is derabbanan.

Speaker 2: One who stands in prayer and remembers that he already prayed, I already mentioned, now, to begin davening one may begin even if he knows for certain that he already davened, because prayer is nedavah. But he began… But he began… The person has a chazakah (presumption) that he didn’t daven, and… I don’t know, a good question. Let’s first say the halachah.

Remembered in the Middle of Prayer That He Already Prayed — He Stops

What the Rambam says, if he began to daven al da’at shehu chovah (with the intention that it’s obligatory), I’ll just explain the halachah. If he began to daven, he’s davening a tefillat chovah (obligatory prayer), and in the middle he remembers, “Oh, I already davened,” the Rambam says, posek afilu be’emtza berachah (he stops even in the middle of a blessing).

The Rambam held… One cannot switch from tefillat chovah to tefillat nedavah. It’s an interesting halachah. You can’t now think that it’s a nedavah. Yes, and the Rambam says, on this, this is what’s in the Gemara.

Distinction: By Ma’ariv It’s Different

On this the Rambam says, but by Ma’ariv (evening prayer) it’s different. Since evening is reshut (optional), evening is one simple meaning, “hitpalel matchilah ela al da’at shehu mitpalel tefillat arvit shehi reshut,” (he prayed from the beginning only with the intention that he’s praying the evening prayer which is optional), he cannot daven from the aspect of obligation by Ma’ariv. Consequently, by Ma’ariv, if he remembers in the middle of Ma’ariv that he already davened Ma’ariv, he can continue.

It’s very interesting, why can’t one switch in the middle? I don’t know.

Discussion: What Does “Posek” Mean?

So there’s a Gemara actually. I don’t know if it’s literally a Gemara. It’s in the Gemara, “nizkar shehitpalel posek,” (remembered that he prayed, he stops), the Gemara is very clear about this. But the Rishonim struggled about this topic, what is the simple meaning why can’t he say that it’s tefillat nedavah? He can’t switch.

Speaker 2: That he may stop?

Yes, he doesn’t have to go further. Because he went further because he thought he was obligated, and he’s not obligated.

Why by Ma’ariv is he indeed obligated not to stop? Because Ma’ariv is reshut. Because by Ma’ariv he shouldn’t stop, because… You began anyway al da’at she’eino chov (with the intention that it’s not obligatory), you’re anyway a volunteer. This is an agreement in a mitzvah, he said to them to finish.

But by Shacharit (morning prayer), he may not daven further according to the order of prayers, he caught himself that the entire prayer became a mistake.

Opinion of the Commentators: “Posek” Means Obligation

All the commentators established here that “posek” means he must stop, not he may stop. And they understood that the reason is that one cannot switch from obligation to nedavah in the middle.

And the Rambam distinguishes even on Ma’ariv, and the commentators learn because the Rambam said, the Rambam already said that we do indeed daven Ma’ariv today as an obligation, Ma’ariv is not a nedavah. So even then it will indeed become an optional tefillat nedavah, tefillat reshut is not the same thing as tefillat nedavah.

Innovation: “Posek” Means He May Stop

Okay, until here is when he remembered that he davened. I would say my simple meaning is a very good simple meaning, “posek” means that he may stop, and once he may stop there’s no reason he should now start thinking about tefillat nedavah, we don’t need any tefillat nedavah.

Okay, but what should one do when all other Jews thought a different interpretation for you? Presumably they had some reason. I’m still a Jew.

Halachah 7: One Who Erred and Prayed Weekday on Shabbat

Further, one who erred… another sort of error. Until now we learned an error that he says something wrong, a certain sort of error, the simple meaning wasn’t clear which error was being discussed in all these previous things.

Now it’s like this, whoever erred and he davened a weekday on Shabbat, he is not yotzei (fulfilled his obligation), he just davened a weekday on Shabbat. What happened?

Remembered in the Middle — Finishes the Blessing and Returns

Now when does he remember? If he remembers in the middle of davening, he finishes the blessing that he began, if he began a tachanun, he finishes a tachanun.

Why does he finish a tachanun? Because there’s no prohibition to say a weekday prayer on Shabbat, only the halachah said not to, but if one says yes, it’s troublesome on Shabbat. But he finishes it.

But in any case he needs to go back, he needs to begin from the beginning, from the blessings of the mitzvot, from Atah Chonen.

Speaker 2: What does it mean he davens further? Chozer (returns), no?

Moshe says chozer. Returns to where?

Speaker 2: Ah, he goes until the tefillat hamitzvot apparently, or perhaps until…

So is the halachah of error. Yes, he goes back, chozer to the beginning of Atah Kadosh, from where the halachah began. This is what he forgot, I mean it doesn’t say what else to forget. Yes.

Distinction: By Musaf — He Stops Even in the Middle of the Blessing

The Rambam says, around you, and by Ma’ariv and by Shacharit and by Minchah, this is when one finishes the blessing. But by Musaf (additional prayer) posek afilu be’emtza haberachah (he stops even in the middle of the blessing), as if he has nothing here of the blessing.

Speaker 2: No, good, because Musaf doesn’t require any Atah Chonen, consequently you don’t have what to say Atah Chonen in Musaf, it doesn’t come in here at all.

Very good.

If He Completed the Entire Prayer — He Returns and Prays

And the same thing, if he completely finished, it doesn’t mean only he was holding in the middle, like before, if he said a weekday prayer the whole thing, the whole world thought he’s davening Musaf, when he davened a weekday Shemoneh Esrei.

Speaker 2: By Ma’ariv, what does he need to do? He needs to pray over the whole thing anyway. No, what happens by Ma’ariv, by Shacharit Minchah Ma’ariv, when he said the entire weekday Shemoneh Esrei, does he indeed need to pray over the entire Shemoneh Esrei with Shabbat. So Musaf isn’t different, I don’t catch what he wants.

Discussion: Why is Musaf Different?

And one who prayed weekday al da’at shehu musaf (with the intention that it’s Musaf), so apparently it’s the same thing. He davened a weekday prayer, he needs to afterwards daven a Shabbat prayer. He already was a prayer, only it was done with the trouble of a weekday Shemoneh Esrei.

Speaker 2: No, but he says he doesn’t agree in the lesson of Shabbat. What does he need? So I understand. He finishes the entire blessing, but apparently he indeed needs to. Why is Musaf different?

Right, so it says in the Rambam, hamitpalel shel chol beShabbat lo yatza (one who prays weekday on Shabbat did not fulfill his obligation). Apparently by Musaf also the halachah should be that… I mean, I don’t see what’s different about Musaf from Shacharit and Ma’ariv if he finished.

Dispute of Versions: Yatza or Lo Yatza?

It turns on the halachah, it turns that no, by Ma’ariv if he davened the entire weekday, yatza (he fulfilled his obligation). True, there was a dispute of versions here, there were versions where it said one who prayed weekday on Shabbat yatza. According to this the halachah fits better. Not clear.

Do you understand? It could be that there’s a problem of versions here. It must be, it could be that one is completely yotzei if one says completely weekday. But here is from the version of Musaf, so the second piece explains, that it doesn’t fit that something Musaf is different from Shacharit. Apparently Shacharit is the same as Musaf.

Here what you say yatza, lo yatza, is a version. In the beginning of the halachah it says yatza. It fits with the matter of Musaf here. Yes.

Speaker 2: That by Musaf is different, because by Musaf there isn’t any weekday Shacharit. It’s a weekday Musaf. There’s no language of a weekday Musaf. There’s no such reality, one doesn’t make any Musaf during the week. There can be many Musafs which are either on Rosh Chodesh, or on Yom Tov, or on Shabbat.

Ah, the same thing Shabbat, Yom Tov, Rosh Chodesh. It’s also Rosh Chodesh, and one said in Musaf “vetitten lanu” (and You gave us). It’s in his Musaf that Reb Gershon took out, or Reb Chaim Kanievsky’s glosses there. I don’t know, but he brings both of them.

Speaker 2: What’s the question? Lo yatza. The lo yatza is interesting. But the question is how… If only… Lo yatza, right? What? What is the halachah of one who… who is mitpalel weekday on Shabbat, lo yatza. One needs to stand and daven for Shabbat. I don’t know. He says the entire week the Shemoneh Esrei?

Yes. I don’t know what the halachah is. He doesn’t say. Let’s look, he usually brings what the Shulchan Aruch HaRav says. Yes, he asks the question on Musaf. Ah, yes, it has to do with the versions. It could be he wasn’t mentioning of Shabbat.

He says that there’s a da’at haRambam (opinion of the Rambam), he says that the da’at haRambam is implied that only by Musaf he is not yotzei. Simple meaning, he did indeed say some word of Shabbat, so he indeed was mentioning of Shabbat.

Innovation: The Aspect of Mentioning Shabbat

It was a good place for a Brisker to every… every Shemoneh Esrei to mention something of Shabbat. Why should he pray over Shabbat? He said a word of Shabbat. So one does by Berachah Me’ein Shalosh (abbreviated blessing).

Speaker 2: Yes, but what is the aspect that one is not yotzei if one prays the entire weekday on Shabbat? Not because one may not make the blessings, one may indeed. The aspect is that you have an obligation to mention Shabbat. So you only need to mention Shabbat. The mentioning Shabbat doesn’t mean the entire liturgy. The entire liturgy was instituted for Shabbat by the Sages. It could be he wasn’t yotzei. And the matter of davening Mashiv Haru’ach (He makes the wind blow), certainly that one needs to say on Shabbat the…

Okay, now we’re going to learn about certain errors. Until now we learned in general, or only one detail, when he made an error when he said. Now we’re going to learn certain things that he forgot.

Speaker 2: He erred about which world he’s in, the world of Atzilut (Emanation), the world of Beriah (Creation).

Now one will say when he erred about the weather, about which season he’s in. Something is still missing for me, what is the interpretation of the internal halachot? I mean, I feel that there’s missing a basic interpretation.

Speaker 2: What, ta’ah (erred)? Yes, “ve’im ta’ah bish’ar hashanah” (and if he erred during the rest of the year) – does this itself mean that he said “Morid HaGeshem” (He brings down the rain)? Because here it says extra the halachot on what he said twice everything. Something is still missing for me.

So it could be that “ta’ah” means what you said, that he doesn’t know where he’s holding?

Speaker 2: No, he doesn’t know in which world he is. He doesn’t know where he’s holding.

Yes, but that’s simple, then he’s a safek (doubt). A safek goes back to… Ah, in general, a safek needs to be a safek derabbanan. Why should he go back if it’s a safek? I don’t know, something is still missing for me. Some simple thing I don’t know.

Halachah 8: Erred in Mentioning Rain and Dew

Now it’s like this, a Jew erred in the winter, he didn’t say “Morid HaGeshem” and also not “Morid HaTal” (He brings down the dew), he needs to go back to the beginning, because this is an error during the rest of the year, he goes back.

Speaker 2: He didn’t say “Morid HaGeshem”, what makes him aware? He’s not aware.

If He Mentioned Tal — He Does Not Return

But if he mentioned tal in the summer days, he doesn’t return, because it’s close enough. He already made the Almighty aware of the matter, of the fact that he takes care to carry the sustenance of the fields. Yes, tal.

In the Summer Days — If He Said “Morid HaGeshem” He Returns

But in the summer days, if he says “Morid HaGeshem”, then it doesn’t help that he said “Morid HaTal”. That means, he said “rain”, it doesn’t help, he said but very good. Because in the summer days rain is not a good thing. So on him, yes, so one needs to be chozer to the beginning, because he made an error.

The Rambam’s Doubt: If He Didn’t Mention Tal in the Summer Days

But conversely, if he didn’t mention tal, that is, in the summer days. The Rambam is in doubt, he couldn’t say clearly that in the summer days one mentions tal and in the rainy season geshem. That is, if he made an error and he didn’t say tal in the summer days, one makes a gezeirah shavah (textual analogy), one needs tal, one says because it’s a request.

It’s not truly so important to mention tal, because tal anyway doesn’t stop. So why does one mention it at all? Ah, one mentions the Almighty’s deeds, the deeds that He provided for us. So why should one mention it less? When it’s a request, fine.

Discussion: Mention as Preparation for Request

And the whole thing is not a request. It’s not thanking is also a form of request, one reminds the Almighty His role, that He needs to give rain. It’s certain that this thanking, ah, and it’s implied that the mentioning in certain places is a preparation for the request. One will later request about this, first one mentions, so it fits for everything that there should first be praise.

Digression: Places Where Rain Falls in Summer

Laws of Errors in Prayer — Continuation: Mention of Rain, Ya’aleh V’yavo, and the Law of the Prayer Leader

Mention of Rain — Continuation of Discussion

Why is Mention Different from Request?

Speaker 1: Why should one mention it less? If it’s a request, fine. But the whole thing isn’t a request at all.

Speaker 2: Thanking is also somewhat of a request. One reminds Him of a Jew’s will, that he needs the rain.

Speaker 1: It’s certain that the thanking… ah, in the Book of Psalms it’s implied that mentioning certain praises is a preparation for the request. One will later make a request for this, first one mentions it, because it’s fitting that for every matter there should first be praise.

Repeating from the Beginning — Is it Dependent on Climate?

Speaker 1: And yesterday we discussed that places where it does rain throughout the year, and it also happens that it rains in the summer and it’s not necessarily a sign of curse, perhaps this doesn’t require repeating from the beginning. It could be that repeating from the beginning has to do with reality, with the actual situation, let’s say what the reality is in the Land of Israel or Babylonia. Because for example, my son showed me that you see people in the IDF synagogue from my shul, one of the important shuls, my son, if one prays there on Rosh Chodesh blessing, it says “for dew and rain,” it says there in his siddur, I don’t remember which siddur, that in a place where it always rains, one always says “for dew and rain.”

Speaker 2: Okay, but that’s not a law, the whole thing is a custom, and one must know whether…

Speaker 1: Good, I’m saying, I’m saying, but if the matter of repeating from the beginning is… I hear what you’re saying… what’s the problem, perhaps it indeed has to do with the climate.

Custom of Babylonia vs. Land of Israel

Speaker 1: But we learned in the laws of Morid HaGeshem in general, that is, we learned from the Rishonim, yes, regarding when one begins to mention rain, not to mention, to pray, yes, to request “v’ten tal u’matar,” we saw that in practice the custom is to go according to what it says in the Gemara in Babylonia, although not everyone goes. Even a place that doesn’t need rain in the summer, I remember that we learned that one doesn’t say it in the prayer, one doesn’t say it in Barech Aleinu.

It does seem that it can be simply a matter of “from beginning to end,” not a matter because one needs it. But if you say it’s only because it’s a curse, as the Rosh brings, he says, what would you think, otherwise he would have said in the summer “Morid HaGeshem,” he doesn’t request rain in the summer. I don’t know.

Speaker 2: It’s a sign of curse.

Speaker 1: I don’t know, I don’t know if it’s… okay, yes, this is a dispute of customs.

Morid HaTal — Dispute of Customs

Speaker 1: I mean the Rambam holds like Nusach Sefard in our time, that one says “Morid HaTal” in the summer. The other Ashkenazim didn’t say Morid HaTal at all, that is in the summer, because for the same reason, it doesn’t fail.

Prayer of the High Priest in the Holy of Holies

Speaker 1: So when the Kohen prays in the Holy of Holies that it should rain, “and may the prayer of wayfarers not enter before You,” meaning those who pray that it shouldn’t rain in winter, because winter is the time when it needs to rain. Well, winter is very important, and summer is a problem. Let the wayfarers go in summer. Okay.

Speaker 2: But usually they do go in summer. That is, in the summer people travel around, and so on. I don’t notice, here in the winter no one goes, no one comes. But the Rema is speaking here.

Laws of Error — Forgetting “V’ten Tal U’matar”

Law of Forgetting V’ten Tal U’matar in Winter

Speaker 1: Okay, that is, if he forgot the mention. If he forgot to say “v’ten tal u’matar” in Birkat HaShanim, yes, in the summer, excuse me, in the winter he forgot to say “v’ten tal u’matar,” it’s like this:

If he remembers before Shome’a Tefillah, he can do it then. Because this has no order. At that time one doesn’t say that this must be in order, and must say the “v’ten tal u’matar” in the blessing of Barech Aleinu. Initially he should, but after the fact he says it in Shome’a Tefillah. He says “v’ten tal u’matar” just like that. Just the words “v’ten tal u’matar.” There is a longer version, I don’t know.

But if he has already finished, then he must go back to Birkat HaShanim, and apparently repeat everything from Birkat HaShanim until the end.

If he didn’t remember until he finished the entire Shemoneh Esrei, then he must pray the entire Shemoneh Esrei again.

Discussion: Is Repeating from the Beginning a Test of Intention?

Speaker 1: This is important. And this is actually a contradiction to these things, one can pray without intention, because all these things, the simple meaning is that it’s a test that a person must have intention. No, but if he prays by rote, he won’t get stuck at Morid HaTal. He’ll read for a long time, but if he’s become accustomed.

Okay, that is, the Rema doesn’t bring now the laws of being accustomed. But this isn’t a test. Rather the point is, the reason why one repeats from the beginning is not because one must have intention. And in general, one who has intention, that’s not the intention we’re talking about. It could be a Jew who doesn’t agree, because intention has nothing to do with this, because if a Jew is in great devekut and he remembers that he stands before a King, he forgets the whole world. It’s not a contradiction, they’re two different things.

Novel Point: Certainly, all these laws of error are not laws of intention, they’re laws of error, that one must say the correct words according to the order.

Furthermore, but if he’s a dry person in prayer, like a robot. Here they didn’t say the laws of Morid. But I thought when I learn these things, if it’s so important that if one mentions rain in summer it’s not a good thing, meaning that for this person’s needs he must also think very seriously.

Digression: Personal Requests vs. Rabbinic Enactment

Speaker 1: For example, I want to give an example of a person whose entire livelihood is from the stock market, and he’s praying and he didn’t mention the stock market, it’s like someone for whom it was winter and he didn’t mention rain, he didn’t mention what is the most important thing for him. So he wasn’t fulfilling the essential prayer, which is truly a person’s prayer.

Speaker 2: I don’t agree, because we learned that this is the enactment of the Jews that the blessings of mitzvot are like fathers to all the needs of a person. So Barech Aleinu we requested abundance in general. But one must say rain, one doesn’t have to. Just like that, if he didn’t mention it, he won’t be requesting rain, he must pray again. But he doesn’t have to pray for all the details, he doesn’t make stringencies. But he said Barech Aleinu.

Speaker 1: Okay, again, if one indeed must pray again because he didn’t say the stock market or the match, I mean to say what presses him the most. Rav Yosef said that he doesn’t yet have to pray again.

Speaker 2: No, because… but you see the thought, because if for this person the thing is as important as it is for an average person in earlier times that it shouldn’t rain in summer, then it’s like that.

Speaker 1: I don’t agree. Like the story of the holy Ropshitzer grandfather, he heard a Jew say “Echad,” he told him that he forgot something. He said, “What did I forget? I said the four directions of the world, I said the seven stars, seven heavens.” He said, “You forgot yourself, you forgot that the Almighty is my King.”

I don’t agree. I don’t agree with that statement, and I also don’t agree with the law. Because the law… I mean that it’s not correct.

Novel Point: Laws of Error are Formality, Not Intention

Speaker 1: One can’t try to make sense of the law. All this law, the simple meaning is that there’s an enactment, there’s an order how it’s proper, and so it comes that one must say it correctly. It’s not the simple meaning that the Almighty doesn’t understand all these things. Certainly not what you think to feel. If he prays and he’s secluded and he prays other matters.

Speaker 2: No, I’m not talking about that. I’m saying it’s not the simple meaning that if he goes to say “Morid HaGeshem” in the summer, rain will suddenly come. That’s not the problem. The problem is that the text of the prayer doesn’t make sense. That’s the reason for all these laws. And that makes sense.

It’s not a good prayer in the sense that you’re going to break yourself. Not a good prayer in the sense that the person isn’t… because toward Heaven there’s no difference. It’s simply a matter of the formality of the prayer. All these laws are based on the formality of the prayer, not on the intention and not on any of these things.

Speaker 1: So what you’re saying that one must pray with a multitude, that’s a different discussion. That has nothing to do with… it’s not a formality. On the contrary, it could even be that it’s important, it’s not… it’s not a law that it’s indispensable. We’re talking here about formality in the silent Shemoneh Esrei. It’s not a formality of truly public.

Speaker 2: Now you’re asking, well well, on this there’s also formality. If not, the Sages wouldn’t have enacted any Shemoneh Esrei for each person to say silently in the morning. It’s a mere appearance, it’s a formality. The entire enactment is of the Men of the Great Assembly, to learn, that there should be a beautiful text. If you say a text of the weekday on Shabbat, what does it matter, what’s not relevant.

Laws of Ya’aleh V’yavo — Forgetting on Yom Tov/Rosh Chodesh

Law of Forgetting Ya’aleh V’yavo

Speaker 1: In the time of Morid HaGeshem on Chol HaMoed. Where are we? We’re here dancing around. Now, what did we learn before? That one must mention for every Yom Tov, Ya’aleh V’yavo in the Avodah. So what’s the law if one forgot? It depends where one remembered.

If one remembered before finishing the entire prayer, one returns to Avodah and mentions. That is, he goes back to Retzeh and he mentions Ya’aleh V’yavo, and then he finishes. As we learned, if one erred in the first three, one returns to the beginning. In the last three…

If he has already taken his steps back, that is he has already finished the entire prayer, then he returns to the beginning, he must pray the entire prayer again.

Novel Point Regarding Supplications After Shemoneh Esrei

Speaker 1: What’s the question? There’s a Jew who… and an individual, I don’t mean supplications, no, first before taking steps, not supplication. “Since he doesn’t say words of supplication after his prayer,” he conducts himself. They saw that there are two places where one can say what one wants. In each blessing one can say something similar to the blessing, and in Shome’a Tefillah one can request what one wants. And there’s also something called supplications at the end, after “Oseh Shalom” he says what he wants.

So he has a custom, each time he says certain supplications or some prayer that he says, or he makes each time a different one. And when he bows after three steps, before he takes his steps, hasn’t yet finished, hasn’t yet moved from his place. Does it still mean that in principle he’s in the middle of the last three blessings, and therefore he can go back, return to Avodah, he just goes back to Retzeh, and one doesn’t have to repeat the entire prayer.

Exception: Evening Prayer of Rosh Chodesh

Speaker 1: The law is only Chol HaMoed, or Shacharit and Mincha of Rosh Chodesh. But there’s one exception: the evening prayer of Rosh Chodesh he doesn’t mention. Why? Do you remember why? Because Rosh Chodesh at night is uncertain. One doesn’t yet know that it’s Rosh Chodesh. Usually they didn’t know, there’s a law in the laws of sanctifying the month, that one doesn’t sanctify the month at night. Therefore, although we know it’s Rosh Chodesh because we have a calendar, but it’s not yet the status of Rosh Chodesh, so if one forgot to say Ya’aleh V’yavo it’s not dangerous.

Speaker 2: You’re asking that evening prayer isn’t an obligation, doesn’t matter, because in practice, once one prays, one must pray it according to the enactment. The decree is Ya’aleh V’yavo, and Rosh Chodesh isn’t. It’s that all other prayers one returns to the beginning. For all additions, every addition that one has. Including Ya’aleh V’yavo on a Yom Tov, very good, true.

Law of Prayer Leader Who Forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo

General Rule: Prayer Leader Repeats Like an Individual

Speaker 1: Okay. Now, we learned before that the law has already been said once. Ah, but he’s going to say that there’s an exception. All these places where one returns to the beginning, it’s not only the individual who returns to the beginning, also the prayer leader made the same error, and the entire congregation didn’t catch it, yes? Today the congregation usually catches it, I don’t know, maybe not. Sometimes in the synagogue everyone is distracted. “If he erred here when he prays aloud,” the prayer leader must pray again, the prayer leader.

Exception: Shacharit of Rosh Chodesh

Speaker 1: Except when doesn’t the prayer leader have to pray again? “In Shacharit of Rosh Chodesh, if the prayer leader erred and didn’t mention Ya’aleh V’yavo until he finished his prayer.”

The reason is one why, because it’s a burden on the congregation. It’s a long prayer, plus one prays Musaf, and at Musaf one will pray Rosh Chodesh normally. So already the prayer, so it’s a burden on the congregation one, because it’s a burden on the congregation, and secondly, because there’s still a way to fix it, it seems. “Because the Musaf prayer of Rosh Chodesh is before him.” So I should still pray. The Musaf prayer accomplishes both ways, the Musaf prayer makes it so it should be a long prayer, and it makes… but it also gives the solution that at the

Laws of Errors in Prayer — Prayer Leader, Ten Days of Repentance, Al HaNissim, and Havdalah

Law: Forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo in Shacharit of Rosh Chodesh — Prayer Leader

Speaker 1:

Why? Because of the burden on the congregation. It’s a long prayer, plus one prays Musaf, and at Musaf one will pray Ya’aleh V’yavo again. So because the Musaf prayer exempts from the burden on the congregation, one because it’s a burden on the congregation, and one because there’s still a way to fix it, it seems. Because the Musaf prayer is before him in which he will mention Rosh Chodesh. You’re going to pray again.

The Musaf prayer accomplishes both ways. The Musaf prayer makes it so it should be a long prayer, and it makes… but it also gives the solution that at the Musaf prayer you will pray Ya’aleh V’yavo.

Novel Point: The Prayer Without Ya’aleh V’yavo is Not an Invalid Prayer

It’s very interesting, because here one sees clearly that not praying properly doesn’t make the prayer a bad prayer that gets thrown out. No, certainly not. Because if so, what do I have from having prayed Musaf? Musaf can’t fulfill Shacharit.

What’s the practical difference? For example, there was a young man who needed some private prayer, and he said it at the first Shemoneh Esrei that he made for Rosh Chodesh, forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo. After praying again, he thinks that the Almighty won’t listen to his prayer that he prayed for his match, because it was an invalid Shemoneh Esrei. No, the Almighty did listen to you. There’s a matter that there should be every day a good Shemoneh Esrei.

Discussion: Why Does the Leniency Help Only for Rosh Chodesh and Not for Shabbat/Yom Tov?

I thought, if one says that he can pray because of the burden on the congregation because he’s going to pray Musaf, why isn’t this a leniency for other prayers for other people? You’re saying that if one mentioned something, that one didn’t mention here, but in Musaf he’ll mention it.

Speaker 2:

He says, he brings in the Beit Yosef that… first of all, what does burden on the congregation mean? Every time there’s a burden on the congregation. So, something about Rosh Chodesh is special. First of all, Rosh Chodesh is a work day, one can’t just stay in synagogue.

The Beit Yosef argues that Shabbat the leniency doesn’t work. Every Shabbat, every Yom Tov one could say, he forgot Yom Tov at Shacharit, let him wait for Musaf. He’s going to say it plenty more times. He’s going to say it at the streimels, the souls, whatever one sings. If the point is that one should recognize… No, no, no. The point is that the prayer, the Shemoneh Esrei, the Amidah must have a Yom Tov. Must have Yom Tov. That’s the law.

Speaker 1:

True, true. Ah, you’re saying that if so… I don’t know, a Musaf is also the Amidah. Perhaps that’s the point.

Speaker 2:

But he says that Shabbat, when one doesn’t work anyway, one does repeat the text. So says the Beit Yosef, but other poskim say differently.

He says that one prays because of tirchah d’tziburah (the burden on the congregation). So the question is, it’s interesting, for some reason on Rosh Chodesh Shacharis there’s a great tirchah d’tziburah to go through the entire Shemoneh Esrei. You can just say the entire Shemoneh Esrei the whole week, not Shabbos, anyway, it’s a short Shemoneh Esrei. The Kedushah is longer, maybe the chazzan will need to exert himself more, but…

Speaker 1:

No, but there is, the Rambam says two things, but he doesn’t say that there are two reasons. He says one reason, tirchah d’tziburah. And he says, by the way, tirchah d’tziburah alone should have been enough as a good reason, but he doesn’t say it that way. He says, since there is tirchah d’tziburah, one can rely on the motzi (one who fulfills the obligation for others). And if someone is in the middle of a field, then he can also… No, according to the simple understanding it’s good enough.

Tirchah D’tziburah by Shaliach Tziburah in General

We see that there is a concept of tirchah d’tziburah that one must take into account. I saw he brings that the Raavad says that all these matters of an error by the shaliach tziburah, if one remembers after davening, one should not repeat the prayer, because of tirchah d’tziburah. That is, if the shaliach tziburah only needs to go back to one blessing or a few blessings, that’s one thing, but if one completely forgot, I’ve never seen a shul where after Shacharis someone comes to tell them, they say Shemoneh Esrei again.

Speaker 2:

Okay, usually, if no one reminded him, they make a commotion. No, usually…

Speaker 1:

Again, good advice, if you remember at Modim that you didn’t say something there a few tefillos back, if there wasn’t anyone else, you’ll think that you were mistaken.

Speaker 2:

No, in general, in this shul, in most shuls there is someone who listens carefully and makes sure no mistake is made. If there isn’t, how will he give himself advice later either.

Speaker 1:

So you know, Reb Yankele said that the Ribbono Shel Olam has His reshaim, yes? So the reshaim also do the silencing of women, the returning of women… Yes, there are tzaddikim that we need to have.

There’s a story about the Baal Shem Tov or someone who was asked if he forgets yahrzeits, he says, “I never forget, and you forget even the second time when you tell him.”

It’s about this that some say, the Bnei Brak Rav says further from the Baal Shem Tov that one shouldn’t repeat if one makes a mistake, because one will make the same mistake the second time.

Speaker 2:

Well, I don’t know. One must ask today’s rabbis what they say about this. One must learn the halacha.

I already said that all these halachos are a tosfes sachar (additional reward), it’s not a punishment. It means to say that a person feels bad.

Discussion: Being Yotzei with the Shaliach Tziburah if One Forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo

But he says very clearly that a person can listen well to the baal tefillah and be yotzei with that, if he forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo, and he must now stand and say the tefillah.

Speaker 1:

Ah, you’re saying he goes with the baal tefillah. The concept of the baal tefillah is he’s essentially a shaliach tziburah. There’s a halacha that if someone can daven, he should say it himself. If you say that he now becomes an individual yachid who won’t be able to daven again, it could also be that he must, because his davening won’t be a tefillas yachid, not a tefillas tziburah. Because for example, when he stands when the baal tefillah is holding a few blessings later, you don’t say it with the baal tefillah, and he gets disturbed. Okay, but…

Speaker 2:

So perhaps regarding listening to the baal tefillah, what does it have to do with it? It didn’t help in the Ya’aleh V’yavo situation.

Speaker 1:

I don’t know, it could be that he becomes generally a baki (expert), he forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo, so he’s also not a baki. Okay, I don’t know.

Let’s move on.

Halacha: Aseres Yemei Teshuvah — HaMelech HaKadosh / HaMelech HaMishpat

Now, another halacha where he made a mistake, we learned that in Aseres Yemei Teshuvah one says HaMelech HaKadosh and HaMelech HaMishpat. What did one forget? If he forgot HaKel HaKadosh, chozer l’rosh (returns to the beginning), because he made a mistake in the first three blessings. However, if he forgot in the eleventh blessing, he said Melech Ohev Tzedakah U’Mishpat and not HaMelech HaMishpat, he goes back to begin from Shofteini, and he continues al haseder (in order). If he wasn’t shalem kulo (complete), he also chozer l’rosh.

So says the holy Rambam, others argue, that there’s a question whether one must say it. What does chozer l’rosh mean, does he need to say the whole thing. Very good. There are others who disagree with this halacha.

In any case, regarding Melech Ohev Tzedakah U’Mishpat, the later poskim say that one doesn’t need to go back, because he already said Melech. And why is it different for HaKel HaKadosh? Because it doesn’t say Melech. And the Rambam calculated it in Magen Avos which is said after Maariv of Shabbos, he wrote HaMelech HaKadosh the whole year. It doesn’t work out.

The Raavad Disagrees: HaMelech HaKadosh Is Not Me’akev

Anyway, this is the topic here of Aseres Yemei Teshuvah. The holy Raavad generally disagrees. I mean, it appears that the Raavad disagrees on HaMelech HaKadosh also. He says it’s not an ikuv (impediment). He says, lo yatza doesn’t mean lo yatza the entire Shemoneh Esrei, it means lo yatza, he didn’t say HaMelech HaKadosh. That’s how the Raavad interprets it. Eino chozer u’mispalel (he doesn’t return and pray again).

I don’t know why. One can’t say the same reasoning on all the other things that have been until now. On this the Raavad understood that “HaMelech HaKadosh” is not me’akev in Shemoneh Esrei. So if someone forgot to say teshuvah, “HaMelech HaKadosh”, he should know that he can rely on this Raavad. I wouldn’t rely on this, but he can rely on the Raavad who says that one doesn’t need to repeat.

Okay. And he brings, the Raavad brings other gemaras that it says explicitly “lo yatza”, and it doesn’t mean literally “lo yatza”, it only means “lo yatza k’tikana (not according to the proper enactment)”.

Halacha: Havdalah in Chonein HaDa’as

What if one forgot to say Havdalah in Chonein HaDa’as on Motzaei Shabbos, yes? The Raavad says, a Mishnah in Maseches Berachos, that one doesn’t need to repeat at all. Why not? Because he’s going to say Havdalah on wine anyway. That’s what it says in the Gemara.

Discussion: Why Doesn’t This Reasoning Help for Kiddush?

Speaker 2:

But he doesn’t say about Kiddush that he’s going to say Kiddush on wine. Kiddush isn’t… It’s not a Kiddush.

Speaker 1:

Ah, you mean that he is mekadesh that he causes weekday in Maariv of Shabbos. Yes, but it’s not a din of Kiddush. There’s a great difference to say. There isn’t… There are two…

Speaker 2:

On Chonein HaDa’as there’s a din that one should say Havdalah, not that it’s a part of tefillah. No, it’s not a mention of an event. But they inserted it into tefillah. But they inserted it into tefillah, but they inserted it into tefillah… But they inserted Ya’aleh V’yavo.

Speaker 1:

No, actually in the Gemara it’s implied that Kiddush and Havdalah are the same sort of thing. But one can see that the mention of Shabbos on Shabbos is not only with the Kiddush, it’s also with the mention of the day. But the mention of the day, that there’s the essential din that on Shabbos one should say a tefillah of Shabbos. One can say that one is yotzei both with the same word, but there are two dinim, there are two different halachos. That’s how it sounds.

Halacha: Al HaNissim (Chanukah/Purim) and Aneinu (Ta’anis) — Eino Chozer

The same thing for two more things that one forgot Al HaNissim for Chanukah and Purim, or one forgot Aneinu in tefillas ta’anis, eino chozer u’mispalel (one doesn’t return and pray again).

I know why not. What is the concept with Aneinu with… What is the reasoning why it’s not me’akev? That’s what it says in the Gemara, a yom she’ein bo musaf (a day that doesn’t have musaf), a weekday Yom Tov, is not me’akev. I don’t know why. Ani lo yadati lamah (I don’t know why).

Discussion: Why Is Al HaNissim Not Me’akev?

Why is Al HaNissim not me’akev? Can you explain to me?

Speaker 2:

I can say because… because… because… not a Yom Tov? Wait. Rosh Chodesh is the only way how one proves the Yom Tov. Chanukah and Purim, it’s like he’s going to remember it at Musaf, such a kind of thought. Chanukah, he’s going to light candles soon and thank the Ribbono Shel Olam and say “asher kidshanu b’mitzvosav v’tzivanu al mitzvas ner Chanukah”. And also Purim, he’s going to make a… Purim, what is he going to do? And on Rosh Chodesh? He does nothing on Rosh Chodesh. It’s a Musaf, there is the heter for a baal tefillah that he’s going to daven Musaf anyway. But Rosh Chodesh is a chumra, there’s a certain shitah that one shouldn’t work, one shouldn’t fast. Fast. But different ways how one recognizes the Yom Tov.

Speaker 1:

But we see here the thing that if the Yom Tov is mentioned in another way, it’s served in another way.

Speaker 2:

No, because it’s not true. A Yom Tov is more chamur than this. A Yom Tov, just a Yom Tov is forgotten, Ya’aleh V’yavo is the answer. It’s certainly a Yom Tov for whom? For the great ones. It’s because it’s less chamur. The whole Chanukah Purim are not such important yamim tovim, it’s not such a weekday thing. But there’s a way. Ah, yes.

Al HaNissim Is a Later Addition

And nes kodem shehigi’a l’raglav (a miracle before it reached his feet), which means in a ta’anis tziburah, it’s also very simple that a mesorah, when the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah were metaken, when were they metaken, when did they enact Modim Al HaNissim? Ya’aleh V’yavo. Al HaNissim came somewhere at the point when they enacted Chanukah. It wasn’t pressed so strongly into the siddur. I mean to say, it’s an addition that was inserted into a tefillah that already existed. It was something different than Ya’aleh V’yavo.

Speaker 2:

Yes, because the Anshei Knesses HaGedolah enacted it. Anshei Knesses HaGedolah were already after Purim. Mordechai was one of the first Anshei Knesses HaGedolah. Yes, we don’t know.

The Advice of “Kodem SheHigi’a L’raglav” — Aneinu

Speaker 1:

In a way, there’s simply a way, that if one remembered kodem shehigi’a l’raglav (before reaching his feet), he says “Yehi ratzon… shetishma tefilasi po hayom hazeh v’techaltzeni (May it be Your will… that You hear my prayer on this day and save me)”, why he inserts this text here I don’t know. In other words, he can insert it without a siyum bracha (conclusion of a blessing) in his supplications that he says before an eis ratzon (favorable time) before the Ribbono Shel Olam. I don’t know why he makes this specific one.

And for Al HaNissim this doesn’t help. Al HaNissim doesn’t say this advice. One can l’chorah say what one wants, but it’s l’chorah not supplications. Perhaps you’ll say that Al HaNissim has to do with Birkas Modim, Modim anachnu lach al nisecha (We thank You for Your miracles). Perhaps one can say Modim anachnu lach al nisecha v’al nifliosecha (We thank You for Your miracles and wonders). But here it’s not Birkas Modim, here it’s by supplications. The Al HaNissim kodem shehigi’a l’raglav is the time for supplications.

Very good. So a concept, one makes a compromise. We don’t see. From this there is, the others want to learn from this and say that there’s a way, one can make from Al HaNissim a request. One can say “HaRachaman… hu ya’aseh lanu nissim (The Merciful One… may He perform miracles for us)”, or “k’shem she’asisa (just as You did)”, then it becomes a request. By the way, it’s a bit of a strange trick, but this is l’chorah the way. The Rema, we don’t see that he should hold that it’s considered a mistake in Maariv. The Rema writes it.

The whole thing of tefillah is what fits with the language. It’s not a thing. Okay. The Rema doesn’t look like he brought the idea that one can do that trick. Okay. Yes.

Halacha: Forgot Mincha on Erev Shabbos

Now further. More topics of forgot and didn’t. Forgot and didn’t pray Mincha on Erev Shabbos, and now he already davened Maariv of Shabbos, and now he makes Havdalah. How does he make up? How does one daven the later

Tefillos Tashlumin and Tefillah B’Tziburah

Tefillos Tashlumin — Forgot and Didn’t Pray Mincha on Erev Shabbos

Speaker 1: The whole thing of tefillah should just be nice, not making tricks is not a thing. Okay. The Rema doesn’t look like he brought the idea that one can do that trick. Okay.

Yes, now further. More topics of forgot. Forgot and didn’t pray Mincha on Erev Shabbos, and now he already davened Maariv of Shabbos, so he is now obligated, he must make a tashlumin (makeup prayer). How is the tashlumin? How does he daven the later one?

He returns to a question that you already mentioned earlier. Right, but it’s a matter of halachos of Maariv twice of Shabbos. The mitzvah that Shabbos is mentioned, we have a minhag chachamim that on Shabbos one doesn’t mention the long tefillos of Shemoneh Esrei, because we don’t want to burden the tziburah, it’s not a time of asking for mercy. It’s also relevant even if one has a tefillos tashlumin to do, because the tashlumin now becomes only the obligation of making up the seven blessings. The same thing happens on Yom Tov. Interesting.

That is, the tashlumin is like this, he davens now the current tefillah twice, not he davens the previous tefillah.

Tashlumin of Shabbos/Yom Tov into the Week

And the same thing is in another case, when one didn’t daven a Shabbos Shemoneh Esrei, and now it’s already in the week. That is, one didn’t daven Mincha on Shabbos or on Yom Tov, and now Motzaei Yom Tov one has two Shemoneh Esreis. One doesn’t daven a Shabbos Shemoneh Esrei, he doesn’t say “Atah Echad”. You’re already in the week, you daven already a weekday Shemoneh Esrei. Mispalel barishonah u’mispalel bashniyah (prays the first and prays the second).

Why? Because the first is the correct one, it’s Maariv. The mispalel bishtayim (prays twice), or lo hispalel b’achas (didn’t pray one), we did learn that the whole Havdalah is. It’s interesting the way how they bring the makeup tefillah, it’s not “Creator, I owe You eighteen blessings, and I don’t know how I’m now yotzei with seven blessings”. Rather the opposite, you must daven, but you daven now. You don’t need to make something double. One must daven once now, that’s true. Yes, because one owes, but one doesn’t owe the blessings, one owes the tefillah.

Havdalah in Tashlumin

But this is indeed an interesting thing, if one wasn’t mavdil in the first, but was mavdil in the second, one must make a third. Why? Because the simple understanding is, he made the tefillos tashlumin for the obligatory tefillah of now. That is, he didn’t make supplications for his forgetfulness. This is Havdalah, he says this is Havdalah.

If he makes it his tefillos tashlumin, but he davens the wrong tefillah, the obligatory tefillah is with mistakes, and he says and explains that this is a tefillos tashlumin, it’s interesting, and the tefillah becomes like thrown out. He can’t use it neither as tashlumin nor as a regular one. He has a right to daven again.

Speaker 2: I don’t know, I know, yesh breirah (there is choice), I don’t know if the halacha should accept it.

Speaker 1: No, the whole thing, I’m saying, all these halachos are not for the Ribbono Shel Olam. The Ribbono Shel Olam understands, also knows that He told him, he should learn and keep order. All these halachos are for people. For the Ribbono Shel Olam one doesn’t need these halachos. For the Ribbono Shel Olam there are only halachos of kavanah (intention). The Ribbono Shel Olam can tell you, I have pleasure from this. But the Ribbono Shel Olam, it’s not the word.

Chota Niskar — When One Forgets Ya’aleh V’yavo

Okay, in any case, to pray two Shemoneh Esreis, I mean that it’s a merit. I mean that it says so in sefarim. I don’t know if a person who forgot Ya’aleh V’yavo, he must daven two Shemoneh Esreis, is that even better. What, chota niskar (the sinner is rewarded)? Yes, chota niskar. There is such a din that one must pray.

Let’s say, let’s say, he’s a nebach (poor thing), he needs more tefillah. But there’s a mitzvah, there’s a takanas chachamim (enactment of the Sages), an order of tefillah, to mention Rosh Chodesh, Rosh Chodesh with tefillah. He didn’t do it. Now he does it again. The previous tefillah was a beautiful tefillah, but he doesn’t have a Rosh Chodesh tefillah. It’s not that he didn’t say any Rosh Chodesh.

I mean that the person needs more tefillah. Let’s say, a person who doesn’t have the understanding, he can’t be so focused, he needs another tefillah. I agree, I told you, a person who is not yet organized, he doesn’t need to say another prayer for a madman. I don’t agree. I don’t agree that he shouldn’t have any test, he shouldn’t have any… he shouldn’t have any… he shouldn’t have any bracha l’vatalah (blessing in vain). He has a chance that he should stand during the congregation, he doesn’t say any bracha l’vatalah. He must say Baruch shem kevod malchuso l’olam va’ed (Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom forever and ever). He must do teshuvah that he didn’t say any bracha l’vatalah. He bentched, he must daven. He bentched, he bentched, he must daven.

Tefillah Is a Delicious Thing

But yes, I’m going back to what I said. One needs to think, I’ll tell you another thing. On Shabbos he loves to sing, I know, “Kol Mekadesh” Friday night. And one week he forgot. He can sing it after the meal. Or he sang wrong, he forgot, he thought it was Yom Tov, so he sang the Yom Tov melody, he forgot to sing the Shabbos melody, I don’t know what. So he sings the Shabbos melody again.

One needs to think that tefillah (prayer) is a delicious thing, like a melody. We are accustomed to think it’s an obligation, it has no taste. But if it’s a beautiful thing, he missed saying, singing the Hallel that one sings on Rosh Chodesh, as the Rambam says, even Shacharis and Musaf, even when he wants to pray Shacharis l’chatchilah (ideally) and immediately afterwards Musaf, he needs to sit down a bit in between, say some chapters, whatever, sing “Ka Echsof,” “Ka Echsof.”

As the Almighty says at the beginning of Hilchos Tefillah, before praying one should pause a bit, pause.

It is Forbidden for One Praying with a Congregation to Begin His Prayer Before the Congregation’s Prayer

Now there’s another law that also begins, I think it comes in here, because it’s another such law about someone who doesn’t keep properly with the order. A normal person goes with the order that was taught in the previous chapter. What happens with someone who doesn’t keep pace with the order? One needs to tell him what he should do.

The Rambam says this: “Asur l’mispalel b’tzibur she’yakdim tefilaso l’tefilas hatzibur” (It is forbidden for one praying with a congregation to begin his prayer before the congregation’s prayer). He may not begin praying Shemoneh Esrei before the congregation begins. An interesting prohibition, I don’t know exactly what the prohibition is. It’s not clear what he means by the prohibition.

Speaker 2: Perhaps the obligation of tefillah b’tzibur (prayer with a congregation) is what obligates this?

Speaker 1: Yes, basically simple, he means to say that this is what tefillah b’tzibur means. What is the prohibition? He means to say you should pray together with the congregation. Not grab. Therefore you must come earlier to pray together with the congregation. That’s the essence of tefillah b’tzibur. No, it’s not clear.

Now he says this. He means specifically, that when a person prays with the congregation he should pray as long as the congregation. No, he means Shemoneh Esrei. He means he shouldn’t begin Shemoneh Esrei when they’re still holding at Birchas Krias Shema and the like. That’s the main meaning.

Mi She’ichar — One Who Comes Late

Now, a mi she’ichar u’va l’beis haknesses (one who is late and comes to the synagogue), someone who is late and he comes into the synagogue, and the congregation is already in the middle of praying silently, they’re already in the middle of the silent prayer, can he still catch up with Shemoneh Esrei or not?

It is thus: Im yachol l’haschhil v’ligmor ad shelo yagia shliach tzibur l’kedushah, yispalel (If he can begin and finish before the prayer leader reaches Kedushah, he should pray). If he sees that he still has enough time, how does he know? He sees where they’re holding. He can still arrive before the prayer leader has reached Kedushah, he hasn’t finished yet, he can still say Kedushah with the congregation, he should pray. V’im lav (And if not), he should not do so. Why? Because he will miss the Kedushah.

So, what should he do? Yimatin ad she’yaschil shliach tzibur l’hispalel b’kol ram (He should wait until the prayer leader begins to pray aloud), he should wait until the prayer leader begins the repetition of the Shemoneh Esrei, v’yispalel imo b’lachash milah b’milah ad she’yagia shliach tzibur l’kedushah (and he should pray with him silently word by word until the prayer leader reaches Kedushah), he should say every word of the prayer leader silently until he comes to the Kedushah. Then he answers Kedushah with the congregation, u’mispalel she’ar tefilaso l’atzmo (and prays the rest of his prayer by himself). He doesn’t have to keep up with the rest of the prayer, says the Rambam. He only has to keep up until Kedushah, and afterwards he can already go at his own pace.

Others, the later poskim (halachic authorities) say yes that one should keep up with the chazan (cantor) in order until the end of Shemoneh Esrei.

Discussion: Practical Questions About Praying Along with the Prayer Leader

Speaker 2: I think the answer is probably simple, if this is a small beis hamidrash (study hall) and the prayer leader’s voice fills the beis hamidrash, it will confuse you, pray along with him.

Speaker 1: No, here there’s a situation where he can pray by himself. When are you talking about? The worshipper’s she’ar tefilaso l’atzmo (rest of his prayer by himself), that’s the remainder he should pray along with the prayer leader.

This is a practical question. If the prayer leader prays very loudly, you won’t have any kavanah (concentration), you won’t be able to pray calmly, pray along. It’s simply a practical question.

Speaker 2: No, the point is, why until then must he indeed word by word? He can’t do it alone.

Speaker 1: Look, the Rambam is going to say, V’im hischil l’hispalel kodem shliach tzibur, v’higia shliach tzibur l’kedushah (And if he began to pray before the prayer leader, and the prayer leader reached Kedushah), he’s in the middle of praying, but he’s not holding at Kedushah, that’s the point. Here you want him to pray along, and he should be holding at Kedushah at the same time as them. Simply you come to Kedushah and you don’t do what is the ruler.

Yigdal shimcha (may Your name be magnified), chalilah yischallel shimcha (Heaven forbid Your name be desecrated), me’orer ahavah (awakening love) etc., the whole law is here. Why shouldn’t one pray with the congregation early? Because that brings all the problems.

Speaker 2: Ah, perhaps that’s the explanation.

Speaker 1: No, but yakdim (early) is he’s early. On the contrary, me’achar (late), the second law speaks of one who is late, he came late. But also not to be early, simply because he should pray with the congregation.

Proof That Silent Prayer with the Congregation is Also Prayer with a Congregation

Here one sees in the commentator that there is indeed such a thing as silent prayer with the congregation. I said last night and someone last night said that it’s the assumption of the Rishonim (early authorities) that the essence of congregational prayer is the loud Shemoneh Esrei. Here one sees clearly that he must pray the silent prayer with the congregation. I don’t know clearly.

For a practical matter, indeed for those who want to be orderly and would, they want to be able to answer Kedushah soon, but what about the lo yakdim (not early)? I wanted to have… We asked, lo yakdim, simply yes, he must pray along with the congregation, even if he’s early, he should begin with the congregation.

Speaker 2: Yes, but he will finish before the congregation.

Speaker 1: Perhaps as he is the chazan before the congregation, I don’t know what it is. I don’t know, is that not tefillah b’tzibur? Why lo yakdim tefilaso l’tefilas hatzibur (not begin his prayer before the congregation’s prayer)? The congregation wants to pray by itself, I don’t know.

All the commentators say here because tefilas harabbim (prayer of the many) is desirable, but that doesn’t make sense, he already said that. That also means tefilas harabbim, he’s saying a face alone. It seems not. What I want to say is that tefilas harabbim doesn’t just mean that we are in one beis hamidrash and we pray, but that we pray together.

I don’t know. Okay.

Summary

Until here, such… Whoever made a mistake, better one shouldn’t make any mistakes, and one wouldn’t have come to all these laws. Do you agree?

Speaker 2: No.

If He’s in the Middle of Shemoneh Esrei When the Prayer Leader Comes to Kedushah

Speaker 1: Ah, it’s an interesting law, to hear the prayer leader is shomei’a k’oneh (hearing is like answering), meaning as if you’re interrupting with your own. Instead you’re saying it for him, but a moment later you’re shomei’a k’oneh, “Ha’anu v’ha’aninu.”

Speaker 2: No, not regarding this.

Speaker 1: The question was Geonim who argued that he shouldn’t stand. The Rambam says that if the prayer leader comes to Kedushah, lo yafsik (he should not interrupt). There were Geonim who argued that lo yafsik means that he shouldn’t even be silent, because then he’s shomei’a k’oneh.

The Be’er Menuchah laughs at this. The Be’er Menuchah says that it doesn’t make sense. Shomei’a k’oneh doesn’t mean that every thing he hears means an interruption, it means that one fulfills through hearing. On the contrary, one fulfills.

There’s on this some Polish saying that says regarding shaliach l’dvar aveirah (an agent for a transgression). Machshavah tovah HaKadosh Baruch Hu metzarfah l’ma’aseh (a good thought the Holy One, blessed be He, joins to the deed), therefore the thought alone. Perhaps that’s the idea, that a shomei’a k’oneh is such a kind of agent, or a good thought that is for good helps.

But one who heard divrei meguneh (disgraceful words), he doesn’t mean that you said it, he means that the other will accept lashon hara (evil speech).

Yes, but the same thing, here is the same deed, is silence so is the law. The Shulchan Aruch says that one should be silent, one should be silent.

Shomei’a K’oneh — How It Relates to Lashon Hara and to Interruption in Prayer

Shomei’a K’oneh is a Tool, Not an Automatic Effect

Speaker 1:

It doesn’t mean that one fulfills through hearing, on the contrary, one fulfills. This is a tool that you can use, not that it’s forced upon you shomei’a k’oneh.

A Polish Saying — Comparison to “Ein Shaliach L’dvar Aveirah”

Speaker 1:

There’s on this some Polish saying that says “ein shaliach l’dvar aveirah” (there is no agent for a transgression), yes, you know? “Machshavah tovah HaKadosh Baruch Hu metzarfah l’ma’aseh, aval machshavah ra’ah” (A good thought the Holy One, blessed be He, joins to the deed, but a bad thought) – something is such an idea.

That is, a shomei’a k’oneh is that there’s an agent, or a good thought that is for good helps. If one heard a davar meguneh (disgraceful thing), he doesn’t mean that you said it, he means that another will accept lashon hara. Yes, but here he says shomei’a k’oneh on lashon hara.

Practical Difference — Silent During Kedushah

Speaker 1:

Here is the same deed, he is silent. So is the law, the Shulchan Aruch says that one should be silent, one should indeed be silent. He is silent and he hears Kedushah, so he has the mitzvah of Kedushah, but not the transgression of interrupting.

It’s good, it doesn’t mean that, simply it doesn’t mean that shomei’a k’oneh.

The Rama’s Opinion

Speaker 1:

The Rama perhaps holds that one doesn’t need to, one knows that one must interrupt to listen. Okay.