Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Text replace - "Hagot " to "Hagahot "
# If one started the bracha of Yotzer with “Baruch atta Hashem…Asher Bidvaro Mariv Aravim” (the words usually said by Brachot Shema of Arvit) and concluded with “HaMariv Aravim” one doesn’t fulfill his obligation and must repeat the bracha of Yotzer. <Ref> Brachot 12a (according to Rashi, other Rishonim explain it differently) says that if one started with Yotzer Or and concluded with Mariv Aravim one doesn’t fulfill his obligation but if one started with Mariv Aravim and concluded with Yotzer Meorot one fulfills his obligation because the bracha follows the conclusion (whenever the conclusion has it’s own Baruch). Implied from all the Rishonim (see Bet Yosef 59:2) who discuss the Gemara is that if one started with Mariv Aravim and concluded with it one doesn’t fulfill his obligation. So rules Halacha Brurah 59:7. </ref>
# If one concludes “HaMariv Aravim” even if he mentioned Yotzer Or in the beginning of the bracha one doesn’t fulfill his obligation and must repeat the bracha. <ref> Pri Chadash 671:2 writes that the Rif holds if one said Yotzer Or in the beginning then even if he concludes with Mariv Aravim he fulfills his obligation. However, this opinion is in conflict of all the Rishonim and Achronim who agree that the conclusion is needs to be correct but disagree as to whether also the beginning needs to be correct (Bet Yosef 59:2). The Mamer Mordechai 59:3 and Halacha Brurah 59:8 argue with the Pri Chadash’s proof. </ref>
# If one concluded with “Yotzer HaMeorot” but started the bracha of Yotzer with “Baruch atta Hashem…Asher Bidvaro Mariv Aravim” (the words usually said by Brachot Shema of Arvit), there’s a dispute whether one fulfills his obligation and so one shouldn’t repeat the bracha (Safek Brachot LeHakel). <Ref> See previous note. Bet Yosef gives two explanations in the Tur. The first explanation (which is the opinion of the Rosh Brachot 1:14), is that one needs both the beginning and conclusion of the Bracha to mention Yotzer Or to fulfill one’s obligation. S”A 59:2 (along with Rama’s comment) rules that if one didn’t say the beginning of the Bracha and the conclusion correctly one doesn’t fulfill his obligation and so he must repeat. So holds the Prisha 59:3. Derisha 59:1, Levush 59:2, Bach 59, Hagot Hagahot Maralach 59:1, Taz 59:1, Magan Avraham 59:1, Chemed Moshe 59:1, Mamer Mordechai 59:4, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 59:1, and Kaf HaChaim 59:15. The second explanation is that as long as the conclusion is correct one fulfills his obligation. The Bet Yosef says that this is also the opinion of the Rashba (Brachot 12a) in name of Rashi. So holds the Gra 59:4, and Erech Lechem 59. Halacha Brurah says that this is also the opinion of the Rambam (according to Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 6a, Rabbenu Manoach, and Sefer HaBatim against the Kesef Mishna’s understanding of the Rambam), Rif (according to Hashlama, Sefer Meorot (Brachot 12a), and Rashbetz against the implication that the Rosh and Bet Yosef didn’t quote the Rif), the Rivavan Rid, Nemukei Yosef and Meiri in name of Yesh Omrim. Mishna Brurah (Biur Halacha D”H VeLo Amar) adds that this is the opinion of Ramban (who was explaining the Yerushalmi Brachot 1:4). Therefore, Halacha Brurah and Ish Matzliach on Mishna Brurah conclude because of a Safek Brachot LeHakel even against S”A (so says Chida in Sh”t Chaim Shoel 2:248) we don’t repeat the bracha. </ref>
# If one concluded “Yotzer HaMeorot” and said the words “Yotzer Or” in the beginning of the Bracha (even not within Toche Kedei Dibur of the phrase “Bidvaro Mariv Aravim”) one fulfills his obligation. <Ref> S”A 59:2 says it counts as a mentioning of the beginning is one remembers “Meyad”(immediately). Bach 59, Perisha 59:3, Pri Chadash 59:2 say that if one forgot to mention in the first phrase “Asher Bidvaro Mariv Aravim” and remembers immediately meaning within Toche Kadei Dibbur it’s considered as mentioning it in the beginning. If only remembers later on it doesn’t count as a mentioning in the beginning. So explains the Pri Megadim (M”Z 59:1) the words of S”A. However, Mamer Mordechai 59:4, Mishna Brurah (Biur Halacha D”H Venizkar Meyad), Shalmei Tzibbur 90a, Kaf HaChaim 59:16, and Halacha Brurah 59:7 explain that S”A used the word “Meyad” as the usual case as it seems from Bet Yosef and so one only needs to remember anytime before the bracha at the conclusion. </ref>
# If one needs to repeat the bracha of Yotzer Or (because of a mistake) it should be said immediately. However if one didn’t realize the mistake until after the next bracha of Ahavat Olam then one should only say it after Shemona Esrah. Ashkenazim have what to rely on to say Yotzer Or after Ahavat Olam before Shema. <Ref> S”A 60:2 rules that one can say Shema without Brachot and then later say the Brachot. Therefore, Magan Avraham 59:1 says if one needs to repeat the bracha and one already said the bracha of Ahavat Olam one shouldn’t interrupt there with Yotzer Or but rather should say it after [[Shemoneh Esrei]]. So holds Beir Heteiv 59:2, Machsit HaShekel 59:1, Kesher Gudal 1:4, Shalmei Tzibbur 90a, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 59:1, Siddur Bet Ovad (Dinei Kriyat Shema 4), and Halacha Brurah 59:8. However the Eliyah Raba 59:2 argues that it’s not an interruption and needs to be said before Shema. So rules Derech HaChaim in name of the Rashba, Kaf HaChaim 59:17, and Mishna Brurah 59:2. However Halacha Brurah and Sh”t Tehila LeDavid 59:5 say that the Eliyah Raba says it’s not an interruption only according to Rashba (Brachot 11b) who says that Ahavat Olam isn’t a Brachot HaMitzah. However, Ramban (Likutei HaRamban beginning of Brachot D”H Kavar Haya) disagrees and holds it’s a Birkat HaMitzvah. Thus, one should not interrupt like the Magan Avraham. [The first explanation of the Bet Yosef 59 says that the Rosh (Sh”t HaRosh 4:19) holds Ahavat Olam isn’t a Birkat HaMitzvah and Rambam (Brachot 1:17) holds it is a Birkat HaMitzvah.] </ref>
# If one is unsure whether he’s in middle of Brachot Yotzer Or or Ahavat Olam such as he was caught saying “HaGadol Hagibor VeHanorah” which appears in both Brachot and was unsure which he was saying, he should return the Hagol Hagibor of the first bracha. Yet, one has what to rely on to continue with the second Bracha. <ref> Sh”t Pri HaAretz 1:3 rules that one should return to the first bracha. Sh”t Mateh Efraim Arditi 2 pg 3b, Sh”t Kol Eliyahu 2:4, Petach Dvir 60:3 concur. Halacha Brurah 59:17 supports this from the Meiri (Brachot 16a), Nemukei Yosef (16a), and Piskei Riaz (Brachot 2:3(3)) who write the law if one is unsure while in middle of Kriyat Shema he should return the earlier mention of the similar words and conclude “so too by Brachot of Shema before and after.” Halacha Brurah concludes that in our case there isn’t an issue of Safek Brachot LeHakel since according to some Rishonim if one doesn’t say the first bracha at all and only said the second one would be making a bracha levatala because both are necessary. In our case there is a safek whether to go back and perhaps say an extra bracha that’s unnecessary or to continue and perhaps be actively making the second bracha levatala. Nonetheless, many Achronim rule that a person should continue from the second bracha because of Safek Brachot LeHakel including Yad Aharon (Hagot Hagahot Tur 60), Bear Heteiv 60:1, Sh”t Kriyat Chana 1, Shalmei Tzibbur 91c, Kesher Gudal 10:8, Hagot Hagahot Rabbi Akiva Eiger 64:3, Sh”t Nishmat Chaim 6, Chesed LeAlafim 60:5, and Ben Ish Chai Shemot 4. </ref>
== Interruptions==
# If one hears Kedusha, one can only answer “Kadosh Kadosh…” and “Baruch Kavod…”, but not “Yimloch Hashem…” <ref> By Birchot Shema, Rosh brachot 2:5 quotes Maharam MeRutenberg who says even though the gemara (Brachot 13b) allows an interruption of greeting one who is due respect still one can’t interrupt one praise of Hashem with another. The Rosh argues that one can answer kaddish or kedusha and brings a proof from Brachot 21a that only in [[Shemoneh Esrei]] one can’t answer dvarim shebekedusha. So rules Tur and S”A 66:3 that one in kiryat Shema one can interrupt for Kaddish, kedusha and baruchu.. Since regularly Shulchan Aruch 125:1 holds one doesn’t say the entire passage of Kedusha and the Arizal (Shaar Kavanot 3 of Chazarat Amida pg 39a) holds one does say the entire passage, in a place where one can’t interrupt then one shouldn’t say the entire passage, so holds Kaf Hachaim of Rabbi Chaim Sofer 66:18. Concerning Yimloch, the Divrei Chamudot Brachot 2:23 says Yimloch isn’t one of the relevant pasukim said by Yishya and Yichezkel from the angels. Magan Avraham 66:6 supports this with a Tosefta and we hold not like the Hagat Yesh Nochlin (azharat tefilah 12 D”H vechen le’inyan). So holds Eliyah Raba 66:5, Yad Aharon 66 Hagot Hagahot Hatur, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 66:5,Shalmei Tzibbur 96, Chaye Adam 20:4, Sh”t Chatom Sofer Kovetz teshuvot 4, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 16:3, Mishna Brurah 66:17, Sh”t Yabea Omer O”C 2:4, Sh”t Yechava Daat 6:3, Halichot Olam 1 Shemot 5 D”H VeDah. However the Gra 66:10 argues based on many rishonim (such as Ravya Brachot 66, Orchot Chaim Tefilah 78) that Yimloch is part of Kedusha. Therefore one should refrain from saying Yimloch during Brachot Kiyat Shema. </ref>
# One can’t answer Baruch Hu Ubaruch Shemo <ref> Magan Avraham 124:9 says any time one isn’t allow to talk one can’t answer Baruch Hu UBaruch Shemo, therefore seemingly in [[Pesukei DeZimrah]] and Brachot Kriyat Shema one can’t answer it (according to Rif and Rosh (Brachot, Ein Omdin) who say not to interrupt with speech from Brauch Shamar until after [[Shemoneh Esrei]]). Bear Heteiv 66:9, Chida in Tov Ayin 18:35, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 124:8, Sh”t Zechur LeYitzchak Harari 7, implied by Mishna Brurah 51:8, and Halacha Brurah 51:16 forbid answering Baruch Hu UBaruch Shemo. However, Kaf HaChaim Palagi 18:13, however holds that one can answer it even in Brachot Kriyat Shema.</ref>
# One can’t answer the Kedusha of Brachat Yotzer or Uva Letzion. <Ref> Sh”t Yabea Omer 5:7(2) says not to answer because of the Rishonim who hold that it’s not a Dvar Shebekedusha (Ravya 1:2,66, Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 13a in name of some Geonim, Hagot Hagahot Maymonit Tefilah 7:90 in name of Rashi, Sh”t Maharam 143, Mordechai Brachot 69, Rosh (Brachot 3:18, Megilah 3:7), Tur 59, Orchot Chaim (Din Kedusha Meyushav 1), Ritva Megilah 23b). Sh”t Otzrot Yosef 4:4 rules that even in Pesukei Dezimrah one shouldn’t answer it for the same reason. </ref>
# One can’t interrupt for the Vayavor and the 13 midot. <Ref> Sh”t Otzrot Yosef 4:4 </ref>
# One should answer only the first three words of Modim Derabanan, “Modim Anachnu Lach” and the rest one should just recite it in thought. <Ref> S”A 66:3 says that one can interrupt Kriyat Shema with Dvarim Shebekedusha like the Tosfot (Brachot 13b D”H Shoel; Megilah 18b D”H Nekot), Ravyah 1:47, Mordechai (Brachot 40), Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 7b, Shibolei HaLeket (Brachot, end of 15), Bach 66 in name of Smak 104, and Rosh 2:5. [However, Rosh (Brachot 2:5) and Rabbenu Yerucham (2:3 pg 24a) quote Maharam MeRotenburg who forbids Dvarim Shebekedusha.] Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah 7b say that one shouldn’t say Modim Derabban but rather only bow with the congregation. Bet Yosef 66:3 quotes Trumat HaDeshen 2 who says that one can answer Modim Derabbanan. Bet Yosef concludes that saying the word “Modim” wouldn’t be forbidden even according to Talmedei Rabbenu Yonah. The Achronim explain that the S”A 66:3 who says one should only say the word “Modim” and not the entire paragraph meant one should answer the first three words. So comments Levush 66, Lechem Chamudot, Taz 66:3, Olat Tamid 66:8, Magan Avraham 66:6, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 16:3, Chaye Adam 20:4, Ben Ish Chai (Shemot 6), Kaf Hachaim 66:22, Mishna Brurah 66:20, and Halacha Brurah 66:16. </ref>
==Shomea KeOneh==
# 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 Hagahot 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>

Navigation menu