Siman 124:7-12 Chazarat HaShatz

MARGINAL MINYANIM

 

Practically speaking, the most common questions regarding the tefilla of the shaliach tzibur regard marginal minyanim, i.e. minyanim where it is questionable whether the ten men can join together.  Therefore, even though most of these principles are not brought in our siman, I will summarize them briefly:

 

The chazarat ha-shatz is meant to be a communal prayer among those who recited together their private prayers. Sometimes this ideal is not realized, either because not all ten prayed together or because not all those who prayed together are "communing" - present and listening.

 

If all ten ALREADY prayed separately - without a minyan - then according to the SA they may form a minyan for chazarat ha-shatz as long as at least one of them has not heard Kedusha, but according to the MB they many not (69:1).

 

IF EVEN ONE HAS NOT PRAYED YET, he may say his own tefilla aloud and act in effect as the shaliach tzibbur (MB there).

 

IF SIX HAVE NOT YET PRAYED they may join four who HAVE prayed, and may say BOTH the silent prayer AND chazarat ha-shatz (unlike the previous case, where the shaliach tzibur's prayer is also the shatz's own tefilla) (MB 69:8).  (However, this is not fully equivalent to a regular prayer minyan, at least according to some opinions.)

 

IF ONE IS SLEEPING then according to the SA (55:6) he counts as one of the ten, but according to a view brought in the MB (55:34) he should be awakened.  (See also what the BH says there.) Two sleeping do not count.

 

IF ONE IS STILL DAVENING the congregation should wait for him to finish. But if it is impossible for them to wait (a common situation in the morning when people need to get to work) then the shatz may go ahead with nine who have finished and one who has not. But two who are still davening do not count (Chayei Adam 29:1).

 

I saw in a summary compiled by Rav Zvi Shechter that the Shaliach Tzibur should wait until most of the congregation have finished, but I have not found this ruling anywhere else.

 

MORE ABOUT SYNAGOGUE DECORUM

 

My readers have probably noticed that this is my "hobby horse."  The SA addresses the problem of talking during prayers.  Needless to say, many people who talk during davening are saying things that are forbidden to talk about in a beit knesset at all; some talk about things that may not be discussed on Shabbat anywhere; and it is not rare to hear people say things that may not be said anytime or anywhere, because they are considered gossip or immodest speech.  Quite often, these are the same people who would never dream of shmoozing in a theater or concert hall during a performance, and so they make a shameful display of which venues they consider worthy of respect and awe.

 

The MB (s.k. 28) returns to the subject of toddlers.  The MB points out here, as he did in siman 98, that this is NOT a question of balancing the benefit to the child against the potential disturbance to the congregation.  Precisely by NOT bringing the child to beit knesset when he is could make a fuss, we educate him that the beit knesset is an awesome and holy place.

 

LEARNING DURING CHAZARAT HA-SHATZ

 

See what the MB says in s.k. 17.  (The source is evidently the Rema on 90:18.)  According to his reason, there is some justification for the fact that recognized lamdanim learn during chazarat ha-shatz in a large yeshiva minyan.

 

However, even this leniency doesn't apply if there are less than nine people listening to the shatz without the learner - see Igrot Moshe OC IV:19.

 

AMEN - ve-AMEN

 

Our Rabbis taught: one should not answer a "snatched" amen (chatufa), nor a "plucked" amen (ketufa), nor an "orphaned" amen (yetuma), nor should one toss a berakha from one's mouth.  Ben Azai says, "Anyone who answers an orphaned amen, his children will be orphans; a snatched one, his days will be snatched; a plucked one, his days will be plucked.  And anyone who lengthens his amen, his days and years will be lengthened"  (Berakhot 47a).

 

The Arukh explains: "snatched" - he shouldn't snatch at the amen, answering so quickly that the berakha isn't even finished.  "Plucked" - the amen is cut into two.

 

Rashi explains:

 

"Chatuf" - with a "chataf" [a vowel intermediate between a "patach" (an "ah" sound) and a sheva].  Whereas it should be read with a "kamatz" [which in the time of Rashi was a long "ah" sound].

"Katuf" - the final "nun" is missing, he doesn't say it recognizably.

 

"Orphaned" - he [himself] did not hear the berakha, but only heard others answering amen.  And that which it says in the gemara (Sukka 51a) that in Alexandria they would wave scarves when it came time to answer amen ... there they knew exactly which berakha they were saying "amen" to, only they could not hear it.

 

Tosafot, in the name of Rabbeinu Nissim Gaon, provide an alternate explanation for the conflict with the custom in Alexandria.  An "orphaned" amen is wrong specifically when one wants to fulfill an obligation by hearing the berakha - as is the case in chazarat ha-shatz where we are obligated to listen to the entire chazara.  This explanation accords with that of the Yerushalmi (Berakhot 8:8) which explains, "One who is obligated in a berakha and answers, but he doesn't know what he is answering."  This is also the ruling of the Rambam (Berakhot 1:14).

 

As the Beit Yosef explains, each explanation of an "orphaned amen" has its own stringency and leniency.

 

According to Rashi, we MUST answer to a berakha, even if it is one we are obligated in, and even if we don't hear it, as long as we know what berakha was said.  But according to Rabbeinu Nissim, we MAY NOT answer a berakha if we do not hear it, if it is berakha we are obligated in.

 

According to Rashi, we MAY NOT answer to a berakha if we don't know what it is, but according to Rabbeinu Nissim we MUST answer such a berakha, as long as we know it is not a berakha we are obligated in.

 

Rav Abudraham has yet a third explanation of an orphaned amen - an amen uttered long after the berakha has been completed.

 

The SA rules like both opinions regarding "chatuf" and "katuf."  How does he rule regarding "yatom?"  What about the Rema?  See MB s.k. 31 and 34 for more details.

 

Given the approach of Rav Abudraham, I have often been surprised at the common custom that the entire congregation responds "amen" to the berakha of one called to the Torah, but the READER responds much later, as he begins to read.

 

 

SIMAN 125 - KEDUSHA

***************************

 

Rav Huna said: "One who entered the beit knesset and found the congregation [already] praying: if he can start and finish before the shaliach tzibur reaches Modim he should pray, otherwise he shouldn't pray."

Rav Yehoshua Ben Levi said, "If he can start and finish before the shaliach tzibur reaches Kedusha he should pray, otherwise he shouldn't pray."

What is their point of contention?  One thinks that even an individual says Kedusha, and the other thinks that an individual does not say Kedusha [and therefore he must take care to hear it from the shaliach tzibur]  (Berakhot 21b).

 

From this source we learn that Kedusha is (as its name suggests) a "davar she-biKedusha" which can only be recited in a minyan.

 

The People of Israel are more beloved before the Holy One blessed be He than the administering angels.  For Israel utter song constantly, whereas the administering angels utter song only once a day.  And some say only once a week, some say once a month, some say once a year, some say once in seven years, some say once in fifty years, and some say only once forever!

Israel [are permitted to] mention the Name after only two words [of introduction], as it is said (Devarim 6): "Hear, Israel, HaShem etc.". Whereas the administering angels [may] mention the name only after three words, as it is written (Yeshayahu 6)  "Holy, holy, holy is HaShem of hosts."

[Furthermore], the administering angels do not utter song on high until Israel speak down below, as it is said (Iyov 38), "As the morning stars sing together [and Israel are likened to the stars - Rashi]", and only afterward "and all the sons of Elokim proclaim"...

 

But what about "Barukh?!"  [It is said without the three words of introduction "kadosh, kadosh, kadosh."]  "Barukh" is said by the Ofanim [who don't have to wait three words], or else once permission is given [to the administering angels to utter HaShem's name after they FIRST say kadosh kadosh kadosh] then no further permission is needed (Chullin 91b).

 

This source clarifies many of the motifs we find in Kedusha, including the comparison of our praises to those of the angels, and the idea that "Barukh shem" is said specifically by the Ofanim.  The idea that the angels recite song only infrequently is familiar from the Akdamot chant of Shavuot, whose author considered the final answer - that each angel utters song only once forever - to be decisive.

 

"And with two [of his wings] he flies" (Yeshayahu 6:2).  Does [an angel] really fly with his wings?!  Rather, our Sages learned from here that a person should "fly" on his feet when the Shaliach Tzibur recites "kadosh kadosh kadosh" (Tanchuma Tzav, verse "ve-zot torat ha-ola").

 

This source serves as a source for the custom of standing up on our toes during Kedusha.  Of course, the ultimate source of all of these motifs is Yeshayahu's vision of the heavenly throne.

 

RESPONSES TO KEDUSHA

 

The central elements of Kedusha are: Kadosh, kadosh, kadosh etc.; barukh kevod etc., and yimlokh.  A congregant who has finished davening repeats all of these aloud.

 

Which of these three elements do we say if we are in the middle of keriat shema?  See MB 66:17.  Presumably, the same holds true for any time when regular responses are forbidden but Kedusha is permitted, for instance Pesukei deZimra (MB 51:8) or in Elokai Netzor (SA 122:1).

 

In which of the three do we raise ourselves up on our toes?  See MB s.k. 7.

 

One who is in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei can not answer to Kedusha, but he should listen (SA 104:7).  Should he also raise himself up?  The Perisha (109:2) has an interesting proof. At the beginning of the shiur we cited a dispute over whether one coming late to services needs to be sure to hear Kedusha (Rav Yehoshua ben Levi), or only Modim (Rav Huna).

 

everyone agrees we must wait for Modim, because we need to bow in Modim when the congregation does so, and it is inappropriate to bow in the middle of Amida.

 

Rav Huna says that we do NOT have to wait for Kedusha.  He holds that even an individual can say Kedusha and won't miss it if he is in the middle of the Amida.  Still, says the Perisha, doesn't he have to raise himself up with the congregation?  Just as we don't want to be in the middle of Modim and face the dilemma of not bowing (thus separating ourselves from the congregation) or bowing (and disturbing our Shemoneh Esrei), likewise we don't want to face this same dilemma regarding Kedusha.  The Perisha concludes, "Perhaps he may also jump up and raise his feet together with them, and show that he is accepting the Kingdom of Heaven of Kedusha with them.  And this is unlike bowing down, which is impermissible."

 

In other words, the Perisha demonstrates that BOWING in the middle of Amida is improper (as we learned in siman 113), but RISING is okay.

 

However, as Rav Ovadia points out in Yabi'a Omer (VI:16), most Acharonim disagree with the Perisha and conclude that one should NOT "jump" in the middle of Amida.  As for the proof of the Perisha, we could say just the opposite: there is no dilemma in being in Amida for Kedusha, not because there is no problem in "jumping," but because there is no problem in NOT jumping.  If everyone is bowing besides me that looks suspicious, but if everyone is jumping except for me that's not as bad.

 

            One who is saying his own tefilla together with the shatz says the whole Kedusha as his third berakha of the Amida (SA 109:2).  The same is true of one who is not synchronized with the shatz but gets to the third berakha at the same time (BH there).  Should these individual raise themselves up? Tefilla KeHilkheta (14 note 30) concludes that one SHOULD raise one's self up in this case.  The reason we don't do so in the middle of the Amida is because it is considered an interruption; evidently the TKH thinks that if one is actually saying Kedusha there is no interruption, just as one may bow at Modim together with the congregation if one is also starting Modim.

 

*********************************************************