Anonymous

Zimmun: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia

Zimmun (view source)

Revision as of 23:14, 27 March 2025

414 bytes added ,  27 March
added links and made light edits
(corrected source error and added links)
(added links and made light edits)
Line 106: Line 106:
**Peirushim Upsakim Al Hatorah Lerabbeinu Avigdor Tzarfati, Parshat Eikev, (can be found in [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=53035&st=&pgnum=80&hilite= Kovetz Shitot Kamai on Arachin 3a pg. 51-51]— there’s room to say that he holds that 1 man can’t lead a zimmun for 3 women, since he only requires women to be yotzei from a man when there’s already 3 men making a zimmun. Seemingly even though there’s an advantage of hearing birkat hamazon from a man, this is not allowed when there’s no zimmun of 3 men. (This matter requires further study.)
**Peirushim Upsakim Al Hatorah Lerabbeinu Avigdor Tzarfati, Parshat Eikev, (can be found in [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=53035&st=&pgnum=80&hilite= Kovetz Shitot Kamai on Arachin 3a pg. 51-51]— there’s room to say that he holds that 1 man can’t lead a zimmun for 3 women, since he only requires women to be yotzei from a man when there’s already 3 men making a zimmun. Seemingly even though there’s an advantage of hearing birkat hamazon from a man, this is not allowed when there’s no zimmun of 3 men. (This matter requires further study.)


**Seemingly, the [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=32520&st=&pgnum=144&hilite= Yad Haketana (Brachot 9:15 footnote 73)] would not allow a man to be motzi women in zimmun if there aren’t 3 men there. <small>(Since he says that women are not allowed to respond to a men's zimmun out loud, in order that it should not look like the men and women are in one group for zimmun, it would seem that he also wouldn't allow a man to lead a zimmun of 3 women when there's no zimmun of 3 men present. This in fact is the logic behind Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach's ruling to not allow this.)</small>
**Seemingly, the [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=32520&st=&pgnum=144&hilite= Yad Haketana (Brachot 9:15 footnote 73)] would not allow a man to be motzi women in zimmun if there aren’t 3 men there. <small>(Since he says that women are not allowed to respond to a men's zimmun out loud, in order that it should not look like the men and women are in one group for zimmun, it would seem that he also wouldn't allow a man to lead a zimmun of 3 women when there's no zimmun of 3 men present. This in fact is the logic behind [https://www.sefaria.org/Responsa_Benei_Banim%2C_Volume_IV.4.9?vhe=hebrew|Responsa_Benei_Banim,_Jerusalem_1981-2005&lang=bi Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach's ruling (quoted in Benei Banim 4:4:9 s.v. beram from Halichos Beisa)] to not allow this.)</small>
Opinions that hold that a woman can’t be motzi men in zimmun:
Opinions that hold that a woman can’t be motzi men in zimmun:
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Tosafot_on_Sukkah.38a.9.1?lang=he Tosafot Sukka 38a s.v. be’emet amru] (at least as it's stated in [https://www.sefaria.org/Tosafot_on_Sukkah.38a.9.1?lang=he&p2=Piskei_Tosafot_on_Sukkah.100.1&lang2=he Piskei Tosafot there])
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Tosafot_on_Sukkah.38a.9.1?lang=he Tosafot Sukka 38a s.v. be’emet amru] (at least as it's stated in [https://www.sefaria.org/Tosafot_on_Sukkah.38a.9.1?lang=he&p2=Piskei_Tosafot_on_Sukkah.100.1&lang2=he Piskei Tosafot there])
Line 113: Line 113:


*Meiri [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Berakhot.47b.5?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en on Brachot 47b s.v. hamishna hashlishit] and [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Sukkah.38a.9?vhe=Meiri_on_Shas&lang=he Sukka 38a]
*Meiri [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Berakhot.47b.5?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en on Brachot 47b s.v. hamishna hashlishit] and [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Sukkah.38a.9?vhe=Meiri_on_Shas&lang=he Sukka 38a]
*Chachmei Provence cited by the [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Megillah.4a.1?vhe=Meiri_on_Shas&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Meiri on Megillah 4a] (Even though there’s room to say that the Meiri himself was writing this point, as Rav Moshe Hirschler seems to have understood [in [https://tablet.otzar.org/#/book/5281/p/20/t/17256353764821234/fs/0/start/0/end/0/c his edition of the Meiri haara 154 page 21]] it's more mashma that the Meiri is citing this from a different rishon. Even though usually the term "Chachmei Provence" is used by the Meiri in reference to the Ittur [see [https://www.sefaria.org/search?q=%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%A6%D7%90&tab=text&tpathFilters=Talmud%20Commentary%2FRishonim%20on%20Talmud%2FMeiri&tvar=1&tsort=relevance&svar=1&ssort=relevance here] for a list of references to “Chachmei Provence” in the Meiri”] it's possible that here he's referring to a different rishon with this terminology, or that he actually is citing a statement from the Ittur which is no longer extant.
*Chachmei Provence cited by the [https://www.sefaria.org/Meiri_on_Megillah.4a.1?vhe=Meiri_on_Shas&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Meiri on Megillah 4a] (Even though there’s room to say that the Meiri himself was writing this point, as Rav Moshe Hershler seems to have understood [in [https://tablet.otzar.org/#/book/5281/p/20/t/17256353764821234/fs/0/start/0/end/0/c his edition of the Meiri haara 154 page 21]] it's more mashma that the Meiri is citing this from a different rishon. Even though usually the term "Chachmei Provence" is used by the Meiri in reference to the Ittur [see [https://www.sefaria.org/search?q=%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%91%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%A6%D7%90&tab=text&tpathFilters=Talmud%20Commentary%2FRishonim%20on%20Talmud%2FMeiri&tvar=1&tsort=relevance&svar=1&ssort=relevance here] for a list of references to “Chachmei Provence” in the Meiri”] it's possible that here he's referring to a different rishon with this terminology, or that he actually is citing a statement from the Ittur which is no longer extant.


*[https://www.sefaria.org/Chiddushei_HaRa'ah_on_Berakhot.45a.7?vhe=Perush_ha-halachot_masekhet_berakhot,_Jerusalem_2007&lang=bi Raah on Brachot 45a]
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Chiddushei_HaRa'ah_on_Berakhot.45a.7?vhe=Perush_ha-halachot_masekhet_berakhot,_Jerusalem_2007&lang=bi Raah on Brachot 45a]


*It seems from the words of the Sefer Hamichtam (found in [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=43537#p=25&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%90%D7%AA%20%D7%94%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D%20%D7%90%D7%9D%20%D7%94%D7%99%D7%95%20%D7%99%D7%95%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%9C%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA Kovetz Shitos Kamai on Brachot 45a, vol. 3 pg 1256]) that he held that a woman can’t be motzi men in zimmun, even though it seems from his words that he did not reach a conclusive decision as to whether women are obligated in zimmun or not (therefore his opinion is relevant even according to the Shulchan Aruch who holds women are obligated in zimmun in this case where she ate with 3 men).
*It seems from the words of the Sefer Hamichtam (found in [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=43537#p=25&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%95%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%A6%D7%99%D7%90%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%90%D7%AA%20%D7%94%D7%90%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9D%20%D7%90%D7%9D%20%D7%94%D7%99%D7%95%20%D7%99%D7%95%D7%93%D7%A2%D7%95%D7%AA%20%D7%9C%D7%A7%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%AA Kovetz Shitos Kamai on Brachot 45a, vol. 3 pg 1256]) that he held that a woman can’t be motzi men in zimmun, even though it seems from his words that he did not reach a conclusive decision as to whether women are obligated in zimmun or not (therefore his opinion is relevant even according to the Shulchan Aruch ([https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh%2C_Orach_Chayim.199.7?lang=bi 199:7]) who holds women are obligated in zimmun in this case where she ate with 3 men).


*It’s possible that this is the intention of the [https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Zarua%2C_Volume_II.369.1?ven=hebrew|Ohr_Zarua,_Zhytomyr,_1862&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Ohr Zarua Volume II #369] (even though in [https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Zarua%2C_Volume_I.184.1?ven=hebrew|Ohr_Zarua,_Zhytomyr,_1862&lang=he Ohr Zarua Volume I #184] he seems to side with the opinions that women are ''always'' exempt from zimmun, it seems that his arguments here that women can’t be motzi men in zimmun are independent of his conclusion there.)
*It’s possible that this is the intention of the [https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Zarua%2C_Volume_II.369.1?ven=hebrew|Ohr_Zarua,_Zhytomyr,_1862&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Ohr Zarua Volume II #369] (even though in [https://www.sefaria.org/Ohr_Zarua%2C_Volume_I.184.1?ven=hebrew|Ohr_Zarua,_Zhytomyr,_1862&lang=he Ohr Zarua Volume I #184] he seems to side with the opinions that women are ''always'' exempt from zimmun, it seems that his arguments here that women can’t be motzi men in zimmun are independent of his conclusion there.)
Line 125: Line 125:
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Biur_Halacha.199.7.3?vhe=Biur_Halacha&lang=bi Beiur Halacha (199:7 s.v. veyotz’ot)]
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Biur_Halacha.199.7.3?vhe=Biur_Halacha&lang=bi Beiur Halacha (199:7 s.v. veyotz’ot)]


*The [https://www.sefaria.org/Bach%2C_Orach_Chaim.689.3.1?lang=he Bach (Orach Chaim 689:1 s.v. uBaal haIttur katav mistabra)] says that according to the opinions that women are not obligated in birkat hamazon mideoraita, they can’t be motzi men in zimmun. (Seemingly he would say the same according to the Shulchan Aruch that there’s a doubt whether women are obligated in birkat hamazon mideoraita— see the words of the Bach and his reference to what he writes earlier [[https://www.sefaria.org/Tur%2C_Orach_Chaim.186.1?lang=bi&with=Bach&lang2=en 186:1]]).
*The [https://www.sefaria.org/Bach%2C_Orach_Chaim.689.3.1?lang=he Bach (Orach Chaim 689:1 s.v. uBaal haIttur katav mistabra)] says that according to the opinions that women are not obligated in birkat hamazon mideoraita, they can’t be motzi men in zimmun. (Seemingly he would say the same according to the Shulchan Aruch ([https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh%2C_Orach_Chayim.186.1?lang=bi 186:1]) that there’s a doubt whether women are obligated in birkat hamazon mideoraita— see the words of the Bach and his reference to what he writes earlier [[https://www.sefaria.org/Tur%2C_Orach_Chaim.186.1?lang=bi&with=Bach&lang2=en 186:1]]).
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh_HaRav%2C_Orach_Chayim.186.4?lang=bi Shulchan Arukh HaRav Orach Chayim 186:4]
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Shulchan_Arukh_HaRav%2C_Orach_Chayim.186.4?lang=bi Shulchan Arukh HaRav Orach Chayim 186:4]
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Kaf_HaChayim_on_Shulchan_Arukh%2C_Orach_Chayim.199.24.1?lang=bi Kaf HaChayim Orach Chayim 199:24] (See further [https://www.sefaria.org/Penei_Yehoshua_on_Berakhot.45b.2?vhe=hebrew|Penei_Yehoshua,_Warsaw_1861&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Penei Yehoshua on Berakhot 45b §2] s.v. Tosafot dibbur hamatchil shani & [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=32520&st=&pgnum=144&hilite= Yad Haketana (Hilchot Brachot 9:15 footnote 71)] who touch on his idea in different contexts.)
*[https://www.sefaria.org/Kaf_HaChayim_on_Shulchan_Arukh%2C_Orach_Chayim.199.24.1?lang=bi Kaf HaChayim Orach Chayim 199:24] (See further [https://www.sefaria.org/Penei_Yehoshua_on_Berakhot.45b.2?vhe=hebrew|Penei_Yehoshua,_Warsaw_1861&lang=he&with=all&lang2=he Penei Yehoshua on Berakhot 45b §2] s.v. Tosafot dibbur hamatchil shani & [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=32520&st=&pgnum=144&hilite= Yad Haketana (Hilchot Brachot 9:15 footnote 71)] who touch on his idea in different contexts.)
Opinions that hold that a woman '''can''' be motzi men in zimmun:
Opinions that hold that a woman '''can''' be motzi men in zimmun:
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=16250#p=192&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%94%20%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F Sefer Hapardes (Rabbeinu Asher ben R' Chaim) (R' Blau ed., pg. 176)] (mentioned earlier).
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=16250#p=192&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%94%20%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F Sefer Hapardes (Rabbeinu Asher ben R' Chaim) (R' Blau ed., pg. 176)] (mentioned earlier).
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=16269#p=71&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%9B%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%A9%20%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F%20%D7%91%D7%96%D7%9B%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D Hilchot Brachot of the Ritva 7:2] and straightforward understanding of [https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.38a.9?lang=he&with=Ritva Ritva on Sukka 38a s.v. tanu rabanan] (mentioned earlier). <small>(According to the interpretation of Benei Banim {3:1:7 s.v. verak} the Ritva only allows this when there are 3 women who are making a zimmun together, not when there’s 3 men and less than 3 women. However, [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=47327#p=213&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= Maadanei Asher Hilchos Brachos, vol. 2, 68:3] and [https://ph.yhb.org.il/category/%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA/05-%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F/#_te01ftn4_12 Harchavot LiPeninei Halacha– Brachot] and R’ Mordechai Leib  Katzenelenbogen [in his footnotes on the Mossad Harav Kook edition of Hilchot Brachot of the Ritva 7:2 footnote 3; in Iyunim Halacha Lemaaseh at the end of the sefer, §23 pg 137] seem to understand the Ritva as allowing this even when there’s only 1 woman and 3 men.)</small>
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=16269#p=71&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr=%D7%9B%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%A9%20%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F%20%D7%91%D7%96%D7%9B%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D Hilchot Brachot of the Ritva 7:2] and straightforward understanding of [https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.38a.9?lang=he&with=Ritva Ritva on Sukka 38a s.v. tanu rabanan] (mentioned earlier). <small>(According to the interpretation of [https://www.sefaria.org/Responsa_Benei_Banim%2C_Volume_III.1.7?lang=bi Benei Banim {3:1:7 s.v. verak}] the Ritva only allows this when there are 3 women who are making a zimmun together, not when there’s 3 men and less than 3 women. However, [https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/reader/reader.aspx?sfid=47327#p=213&fitMode=fitwidth&hlts=&ocr= Maadanei Asher Hilchos Brachos, vol. 2, 68:3], [https://ph.yhb.org.il/category/%D7%91%D7%A8%D7%9B%D7%95%D7%AA/05-%D7%96%D7%99%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%9F/#_te01ftn4_12 Harchavot LiPeninei Halacha– Brachot], and R’ Mordechai Leib  Katzenelenbogen [in his footnotes on the Mossad Harav Kook edition of Hilchot Brachot of the Ritva 7:2 footnote 3; in Iyunim Halacha Lemaaseh at the end of the sefer, §23 pg 137] seem to understand the Ritva as allowing this even when there’s only 1 woman and 3 men.)</small>
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&pgnum=92 Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim 30:8)] considers this as a possibility, although he does not reach a clear conclusion on this matter. He also only considers this in a case where the men are unable to recite the bracha on their own.
**[https://beta.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=14336&pgnum=92 Chazon Ish (Orach Chaim 30:8)] considers this as a possibility, although he does not reach a clear conclusion on this matter. He also only considers this in a case where the men are unable to recite the bracha on their own.
</ref>)</small>
</ref>)</small>
Mpg613
64

edits

Retrieved from "http://localhost:80/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/33948"