Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
10,810 bytes added ,  10:01, 29 October 2010
no edit summary
# One must say Brachot Kriyat quietly with the Shaliach Tzibbur. However Bedieved, if one was able to concentrate on all of the words of the Shaliach Tzibbur (even though the Brachot are very long), one can fulfill his obligation because of Shomea KeOnah. <Ref>Shomea KeOneh by all Brachot is brought down in Tur and S”A 25:10 based on Sukkah 38b, Yerushlami Megilah 2, and Rambam (Brachot 1:11). The Bet Yosef 59 says that it also applies to Brachot Kriyat Shema. He quotes Sh”t HaRosh 4:19 who says if it weren’t for the concern that a person can’t concentrate on the entire long Bracha, it’d be preferable to hear the bracha rather than make it yourself because Ahavat Olam is a request for Torah learning. Yet, by other Brachot, Tosfot (Sukkah 38b, Brachot 21b) writes that it is preferable to say the bracha by oneself rather than hear it from someone else (because of Mitzvah Bo Yoter MeBeShlucho). S”A 59:4 rules like the Rosh that one should say the Brachot quietly by oneself. But Bedieved one can fulfill one’s obligation as the Rama 59:4 writes. </ref> The three stipulations for Shomea KeOneh to work are (1) that the one listening has intent to fulfill his obligation and the one reading has intent to fulfill the obligation of others, <ref> Concerning listening to Shofar blowing, see Rosh Hashana 28b, 33b, Rambam Shofar 2:4, Tur and S”A 589:8. </ref> (2) a minyan is present,<ref> Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 13b writes that even though one can fulfill Kedushat Yotzer individually one can only fulfill Brachot Kriyat Shema with a Minyan because one can’t be Poress Al Shema (according to Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah means fulfilling someone else’s obligation of Kriyat Shema) without a minyan. So writes Ritva (Megilah 23b), Rambam (Tefilah 8:5 according to the explanation of the Kesef Mishna), and Rama 59:4. Ran 13b, Rashba (Brachot 21b) and Gra 59:10 write that according to those who hold a minyan is needed for Kedushat Yotzer one clearly needs a minyan for Brachot Kriyat Shema. Nonetheless, the Bet Yosef quotes the Mahari Avuhav who says that others (Rashi and other Rishonim on Megilah 23b) argue on the Rabbenu Yonah’s explanation of Poress Al Shema. Rashi says Poress Al Shema is a way that a group where everyone already prayed can make a Brachot Kriyat Shema if there’s a minyan. Therefore according to Rashi one shouldn’t need a minyan to fulfill the obligation of others. S”A doesn’t bring the qualification of Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah in S”A and perhaps doesn’t agree to it and prefers the explanation of the Mahari Avuhav. Nonetheless, Halacha Brurah 59:14 writes that since no other Achronim write that the S”A here doesn’t agree with the Rama one should be strict like the Rama. The Achronim (Magan Avraham 59:5, Avudraham (Brachot Kriyat Shema), Sh”t Maharm El Ashkar 10, Machsit HaShekel 59:5, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 59:4, Mishna Brurah 59:15, Kaf HaChaim 59:27, and Halacha Brurah 59:14) rule that one needs a minyan (like Rama) to fulfill the obligation of someone who isn’t an fluent in the Brachot. </ref> and (3) the one reading hasn’t yet fulfilled his obligation. Otherwise, it only works for someone who doesn’t know how to make Brachot. Bedieved one fulfills his obligation even if the one listening knows how to make the Brachot. <Ref> Halacha Brurah 59:14 writes just like Brachot HaMitzvah, Shevach, and Hodah, Brachot Kriyat Shema Bedieved can be fulfilled with the reading someone who already fulfill his obligation. However Brachot HaNehenin one doesn’t fulfill his obligation unless the one making the bracha is obligated for himself. If one hasn’t fulfill his obligation then Shomea KeOneh works without limitation, however if the one reading has fulfilled his obligation there’s a dispute whether he can fulfill the obligation of someone who know how to make the Brachot. Bahag (Hilchot Kidush VeHavdalah) writes that Shomea KeOneh is limited to where the person listening doesn’t know how to make it himself. Sh”t Geonim Shaarei Teshuva 116, Sh”t Rambam Pear Hadar 75, Kol Bo 31, Itur (Matzah UMaror pg 136b), and Orchot Chaim (Kiddush HaYom 14, 16) concur. However, Or Zaruh 2:262, Sh”t Maharam MeRotenburg (Prague 111), Hagot Asheri (Rosh Hashana 3e), Mordechai (Rosh Hashana 721), and Ran (Rosh Hashana 34a) hold that it works whether the one listening knows how to make the bracha or not. Bet Yosef 594 quotes the Mordechai as halacha but S”A 273 rules like the Bahag, concerning this see Sh”t Or Li 41. Yet, Halacha Brurah 59:14 and Buir Halacha (273 D”H Vehu; see Mishna Brurah 585:5) write that one Bedieved someone who knows how to make Brachot can fulfill his obligation. </ref>
# If the Shliach Tzibbor was fulfilling the congregation their obligation and because of a mistake had be replaced in middle of Brachot Yotzer Or, if it was before Kedushat Yotzer the second Shaliach should start again from the beginning of the Bracha. However if first Shaliach already said Kedusha the second one should just begin from right after Kedushat Yotzer. <Ref> S”A 59:5 based on the Yerushalmi (Brachot 5:3). Bet Yosef asks why Rambam left this halacha out and suggests that it goes against the Bavli as the Sh”t Rashba 1:35 suggests. Bet Yosef concludes that one may rely on the Yerushalmi and Darkei Moshe argues that since Poskim brought down the Yerushalmi it’s a Bracha Levatala not to follow the Yerushalmi and have the second Shaliach start from the beginning of the bracha. Machasit HaShekel 59:6 (against the Magan Avraham) writes that even S”A in his wording agrees with Darkei Moshe and retracted from his opinion in Bet Yosef that it’s only if one wants one can rely on the Yerushalmi. </ref> However (nowadays) if the Shliach isn’t fulfill the obligation of others because everyone is saying the Brachot to themselves, then the second Shliach just continues from where the first left off. <Ref> Chaye Adam 29:6, Mishna Brurah 59:29, Halacha Brurah 59:16, Yalkut Yosef 1 pg 113 hold that nowadays when the Shaliach doesn’t fulfill the obligation of others the second should just continue from where the first left off. Yet Sh”t Rav ELiyahu Gutmacher O”C 10 pg 18 argues that the Tur implies it applies even nowadays. Yalkut Yosef argues and concludes because of Safek Brachot the second Shaliach shouldn’t return to the beginning. </Ref>
 
==Ahavat Olam==
# This bracha is instated as the second bracha before Shema. The Rishonim argue whether this bracha is a [[Birchat HaMitzvah]] or [[Birchat HaShevach]]. <Ref> Rambam (Brachot 1:17) says not to interrupt between Ahavat Olam and Shema to answer amen just like one doesn’t interrupt between making a bracha and doing the action upon which you made the bracha. This implies that Ahavat Olam is a Birchat HaMitzvah (as says the Bet Yosef 59 in his first answer). Ramban (Likutim beginning of Brachot) and Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 33b D”H ULeInyan in name of Rambam, Ramban, and Ramo (spelled with a hey). However, Sh”t Rashba 1:47 in name of the Geonim says that they are their own Brachot but not Brachot hamitzvah of Shema because otherwise we should make the bracha with the words “Asher Kidishanu…Likro Et Shema”. Meiri (Brachot 11a) writes that if one only knows the Brachot and not Shema or has a Siddur with only the Brachot one can say the Brachot because they are made for their own topics, the first for the day and light and the second for Torah. Also the Rosh holds it’s not a Brichat HaMitzvah according to the first answer of Bet Yosef 59. Halacha Brurah (Birur Halacha 60:1) argues that some Rishonim (Tosfot (Brachot 11b) and Sefer Meorot(Brachot 12a)) also hold that it’s similar to Brachot HaMitzvah in that Brachot are integral to the mitzvah but the mitzvah can be fulfilled without the Brachot and not totally Brachot hamitzvah in that the Brachot can be said after Shema. </ref>
# The Sephardim start the bracha with the words “Ahavat Olam” and Ashkenazim with the words “Ahava Rabba”. <Ref> Zohar(Vayakel og 202b, Pekudei 260b), Rif (Brachot 12a), Rambam (Kriyat Shema 1:6), Shiltei Giborim (Brachot 11b) in name of Bahag, Arizal (Shaar Kavanot 19a), and S”A 60:1 record the name of the Bracha as Ahavat Olam. However, Roke’ach (Siman 320), Shiltei Giborim (Brachot 11b) in name of many Geonim, Tosfot (Brachot 11b D”H VeRabanan), Ravyah(Brachot 34), Or Zaruh 1:25, Smag Assin 19, Rosh 1:12, and Rama 60:1.
# The bracha doesn’t begin with the words “Baruch Atta Hashem” because it’s a bracha connected to a previous bracha. <ref>Brachot 46a writes that Brachot that follow a previous one don’t begin with Baruch. Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 1a say that Ahavat Olam is a bracha connected with the previous bracha and even if it’s said out of order one doesn’t being with Baruch since it’s established as a connected bracha. So writes Orchot Chaim (Barchu 2), Kol Bo 8, Tur and S”A 60:1. However, Sh”t Rashba 317-8 argues that it’s not a bracha connected to the earlier one since it can be said out of order but it doesn’t begin with Baruch since it’s a short bracha and just ends with Baruch. Interestingly, Meiri (Brachot 11b) says since it’s a connected bracha only when it’s said together with the previous bracha do you not being with Baruch but if it’s said alone one must begin with Baruch. Magan Avraham 60:2 rules like Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah that even if the bracha is said alone it’s said without Baruch. Sh”t Igrot Moshe O”C 3:81 says that since one is allowed to interrupt between the Brachot for amen and even to greet someone who deserves respect, clearly Ahavat Olam is considered a connected bracha even when said alone. Sh”t Yabea Omer E”H 4:7 and Sh”t Tzitz Eliezer 6:2 discuss the dispute in the Achronim whether there’s an issue of interruption in the sheva Brachot at a wedding since the Minhag is for a different person to say each bracha and still some of the Brachot are considered connected Brachot for which we don’t being with Baruch. </ref>
 
==Whether the Brachot are Me’akev ==
# Lechatchila, one must say Shema together with the Brachot. However, the Brachot aren’t Me’akev (necessary and prevent one from fulfilling the mitzvah) and so one fulfills his mitzvah even if he read Shema without Brachot. <Ref> Rosh (Brachot 2:1) writes one fulfills Shema without the Brachot and that Rabbenu Chananel (Brachot 13a; not like our version of Rabbenu Chananel) concurs. Bahag (end of first perek of Brachot), Rashba (Brachot 12a D”H UShma Minah), Sh”t HaRashba 1:47, 69, 319 in name of the Rambam, Piekei Rid (Brachot 13a), and Meiri (Brachot 11b) hold that the Brachot aren’t Me’akev. However, he quotes Rav Hai Goan (based on Brachot 12a) who holds that they are Me’akev but the order isn’t Me’akev. However, the Yerushlami which says the Brachot aren’t Me’akev is referring to an individual, but in a Tzibbur the Brachot are Me’akev. Tosfot (Brachot 13a D”H Haya Koreh) and Sefer Eshkol 1:6 pg 12 hold like Rav Hai Goan. S”A 60:3 rules that the Brachot aren’t Me’akev not like Rav Hai Goan. The Gra (Shenot Eliyahu) asks why is it different from any other mitzvah which the Brachot aren’t Me’akev. Halacha Brurah (Birur Halacha 60:3) and Sh”t Mishkenot Yacov O”C 81 explain that since most of Kriyat Shema is derabanan (only the first pasuk is deoritta according to many Rishonim) that part of the mitzvah was instituted in a larger structure with Brachot and not saying Brachot ruins one’s fulfillment of that part of the mitzvah. Bet Yosef asks on the Tur who doesn’t differentiate between an individual and a Tzibbur. [See Perisha and Bach who argue on the Bet Yosef.] </ref>
# If one only knows the Brachot or only has a Siddur with the Brachot and not Shema, one should still say the Brachot because Shema isn’t Me’akev the Brachot. However, if one knows at least the pasuk of “Shema Yisrael” one should say it with the Brachot. <Ref> Halacha Brurah 60:7 based on the Meiri who writes that someone who only knows the Brachot of Shema or only has a Siddur with the Brachot one should say the Brachot without Shema since the Brachot aren’t Brachot HaMitzvah. Halacha Brurah argues that even Ramban who holds that Ahavat Olam is a Birchat HaMitzvah may agree here because it’s not a complete Birchat HaMitzvah in that we don’t say “Asher Kidishanu …Likroh Shema” in the bracha. </ref>
# If one said Shema without Brachot, later one can say the Brachot without Shema, but it’s preferable when one says the Brachot to repeat Shema. <Ref> S”A 60:2 rules that one can say Shema without Brachot and then later say the Brachot based on Rashba (Brachot 12a D”H UShema Minah), and Orchot Chaim (Kriyat Shema 14). S”A adds that in his opinion when one says the Brachot one should also say Shema. Divrei Chamudot (Brachot 2:3) explains that it’s in order to maintain the order of prayer. Gra 60:6 explains to precede Shemona Esreh with words of Torah. Sefer Meorot (Brachot 12a) discusses whether one can say Ahavat Olam after saying Shema and concludes that one can (like S”A). See further Sh”t Maharil Diskin 2:22. Yotzer Or clearly can be said after Shemona Esreh as in Brachot 12a that says in the Beit HaMikdash they would say Shemona Esreh and only when the time for Yotzer Or came would they say that bracha (quoted by Magan Avraham 59:1). </ref>
# The order of the Brachot aren’t Me’akev. Lechatchila one should say them in order, but if one said the Ahavat Olam first and then Yotzer Or one fulfills his obligation. <Ref> Brachot 12a concludes that the order of the Brachot isn’t Me’akev. Rambam (Kriyat Shema 1:8), Tur and S”A 60:3 bring this down as halacha. The language that it’s not Me’akev implies that Lechatchila one shouldn’t change the order. However, Sefer Meorot (Brachot 12a), Rashba (Brachot 11a D”H Achat), and Ohel Moed (Kriyat Shema 4 pg 36a) hold that one can change the order even Lechatchila. Nonetheless, Halacha Brurah 60:9 argues that this is only according to the opinion that the Ahavat Olam are Brachot HaShevach and not Brachot HaMitzvah, but according to the Rishonim who hold it’s Brachot HaMitzvah would say that Ahavat Olam should be said right before Shema. Additionally, Lechatchila one should say it in order to satisfy the opinion of the Meiri (Brachot 11b) who holds that Ahavat Olam should start with Baruch if it’s said alone. Additionally, Kaf HaChaim 60:9 says that according to the Zohar (Pekudei 260b) and Arizal (Shaar Kavanot, Yotzer 18d) one is changing the order of the upper worlds by saying it out of order. </ref>
# If one only has a Siddur with one or two of the Brachot and not the others or one only knows some of the Brachot, one shouldn’t say them at all because there’s a Safek Brachot Lehakel since some Rishonim hold that saying the Brachot altogether is Me’akev. The same applies if one is very close to the end of Zman Shemona Esreh after which one can’t say the Brachot, one shouldn’t only say some of the Brachot. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 60:6 rules that if someone only says one bracha one fulfills his obligation for that bracha. In Buir Halacha D”H Im Hikdim he explains that according to S”A that one can say Shema without Brachot certainly one can say only one bracha and even according to Rav Hai Goan that one can’t say Shema without Brachot that’s only by a Tzibbur and not an individual. However, Halacha Brurah 60:10 argues strongly that the topics of saying without Brachot and saying one Bracha without another Bracha are unrelated as is evident in the fact that the Sefer Hashlama and Meorot (Brachot 12a) are uncertain whether one fulfills his obligation if he only says one bracha, even though they clearly rule like S”A unlike Rav Hai that one can say Shema with Brachot. Additionally, there is a dispute in the Rishonim and Achronim about this topic. Rabbenu Avraham Aleshvili (Brachot 12a), Ritva (Brachot 12a), Meiri (Brachot 11b), Rashbetz (Brachot 13a), and Pri Chadash 60:1 hold that if one only made one bracha, one fulfills the obligation for that bracha. On the other hand, Rabbenu Chananel (Brachot 12a), Ravyah 1:36, Or Zaruh 1:25 in name of the Rach and Sefer Eshkol (pg 104), and Rambam (according to Pri Megadim M”Z 60:1 and Sh”t Shagat Aryeh 26 D”S VeKivan) hold that one doesn’t fulfill any obligation if one only makes one bracha. [These Rishonim don’t differentiate between an individual and a Tzibbur according to the opinion of Rav Hai seemingly because this topic is unrelated to the opinion of Rav Hai. However Ohel Moed 1:4 pg 36a does differentiate like the connection of the Mishna Brurah to the opinion of Rav Hai.] Pri Chadash 60:2 implies from S”A that only the order isn’t Me’akev but actually saying all the Brachot is Me’akev (and then argues on S”A). Chida (Machzik Bracha 60:1, Kiseh Eliyah 60:1 support S”A against Pri Chadash that saying all the Brachot is Me’akev. Therefore, concludes the Halacha Brurah because of the dispute on the issue and we hold Safek Brachot LeHakel one shouldn’t only say one bracha. </ref>
==Sources==
<references/>

Navigation menu