Simanim 57-58: The Laws of Barkhu

THE WORDING OF BARKHU

 

"Rebbe says: 'For I will call the name of God, magnify the Lord.'  Moshe said to Israel: Whenever I mention God's name, you should magnify [it]." (Yoma 37a)

 

            This midrash serves as the source for the different instances when the congregation responds to the leader in praising God, including the "zimun" for Birkat Ha-mazon, "Barkhu" in prayer and the blessing over the Torah.  Likewise, some of the halakhot of these responses are derived one from the other.

 

            In the Mishna and Gemara (Berakhot 49b) there are two disputes regarding how the "mezamen" in Birkat Ha-mazon should invite the others to join him.  The first dispute is whether we change the wording of the zimun depending on the number of people: Rabbi Yosi Ha-gelili's ruling is that the zimun becomes more elaborate as the congregation grows; whereas Rabbi Akiva denies this distinction - after all, when we say "Barkhu" in synagogue we do not change the wording depending on the number of people.

 

            In addition, the mishna says that if there is a minimal quorum for a "zimun," then the mezamen includes himself among others, saying "Let us bless."  If there is a quorum without him, he merely addresses the others, saying "Bless!"  But our custom is according to Shmuel's opinion in the gemara that it is always better for the mezamen to include himself, since "a person should never exclude himself from the congregation."

 

            The obvious implication with regard to "Barkhu" seems to be that the shaliach tzibur shouldn't say "Barkhu" - "Bless" - at all; instead he should say "Nevarekh" - "Let us bless." The Yerushalmi on our mishna (mentioned in the Tosafot) asks this exact question, and answers that since the Shatz says "Barkhu et Hashem HA-MEVORAKH" - Blessed be the BLESSED God - he himself is also blessing God, and not only asking others to do so.

 

            (It is possible to read this discussion into the mishna.  Rabbi Akiva's asserts that there is no difference between ten and a hundred, regarding the elaborateness of the zimun - and also no difference between ten and eleven, regarding whether he includes himself or invites the others.  Shmuel is only explaining this aspect of Rabbi Akiva's position, asserting that "a person should not exclude himself from the congregation."  The Yerushalmi's question is really on Rabbi Akiva, and is anwered in the mishna itself by Rabbi Yishmael who explains that one needs to say "Barkhu et Hashem ha-mevorakh".)

 

            We have learned in a roundabout way that the custom in the time of the Tannaim was the same as it is today - for the Shatz to say "Barkhu et Hashem ha-mevorakh."  Evidently the custom was for the congregation to respond and for the Shatz to echo the congregation's response, just as we do in Birkat Ha-mazon, and as we do today in the Beit Knesset.  This is the ruling of Rav Yehuda Barceloni and most poskim, unlike the Maharam Rotenberg (who rules that the Shatz doesn't need to echo the congregation).  The difference is exactly the one mentioned: in Barkhu the Shatz has already included himself by saying "ha-mevorakh" according to Rabbi Yishmael, so that echoing the congregation is only a chumra (Tashbetz II:12; Bach).

 

SAYING YITBARAKH DURING BARKHU

 

            The gemara (Sota 39b-40a) mentions a custom to say pesukim during Birkat Kohanim.  One opinion is that this custom is inappropriate - after all, when a master blesses his servant, he should listen attentively.  Another view supports the custom - when a master blesses his servant, he should show his appreciation.  See how the Shulchan Arukh and the Rema rule in OC 128:26 and, correspondingly, how they rule with respect to saying "Yitbarakh" during "Barkhu."  (Compare the view of the Tur in both places.)

 

 

SIMAN 58 - TIME OF KERIAT SHEMA ("KS")

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

 

THE TIME OF KERIAT SHEMA

 

            The time of saying the morning KS is explicit in the KS itself - "u-vekumekha:" at the time when you are arising.  In the mishna (Berakhot 9b) there is a dispute as to when this period starts - Tanna Kamma: when it is possible to distinguish between blue and white; R. Eliezer: only later when it is possible to distinguish between shades of blue-green.  There is also a dispute when it ends - at sunrise (Tanna Kamma, who is R. Eliezer) or at three hours of the day (R. Yehoshua).

 

            It seems that there is a difference between these two disputes.  The second difference of opinion is straightforward: most people get up by sunrise, but kings get up later.  The question is whether the few late risers make this time "be-kumekha" for everyone.  (Does this mean that the time should change according to the wake-up habits of a particular place or time?  See Arukh Ha-shulchan 58:12-13.)

 

            But the first difference of opinion should not be taken at face value.  The five different "distinctions" mentioned in the mishna and gemara are: distinguishing between blue and white, green and white, a wolf and a dog, a donkey and a wild ass, and the time when one can distinguish and recognize one's fellow.  They do not seem to be mere referents to identify different times of day.  Who will tell us how many minutes there are between the time of discernment between a wolf and a dog and that of discerning between a donkey and an ass? 

 

            Rather, these distinctions, somewhat like those we mention at havdala, have a symbolic meaning. The fundamental dispute regards what determines when we can start saying KS? What is the prerequisite for the performance of this commandment? This conjecture is borne out by the fact that the Yerushalmi specifically states that "distinguishing one's fellow" is the same time as "distinguishing between blue and white" (cited in MB 2). The time is the same - but the time's significance is completely different.

 

            The symbolic meaning of the blue-white criterion is explicit in the gemara, as cited by Tosafot (9b s.v. Ela): before we fulfill the mitzva of KS, we should fulfill the mitzva of tzitzit, which can be performed when one can distinguish between the two colors of its threads.

 

            What about the symbolic meaning of waiting until one can recognize one's fellow? We can gain an insight from a related halakha. The mishna on 13a explains that assuming the "yoke of the kingdom of heaven" - the first verse of  KS - precedes the "yoke of the commandments."  But it seems that assuming the "yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven" has its own prerequisites, The gemara concludes that the critical "distinction" is recognizing his fellow; the message seems to be that before we come to recognize God we must be able to recognize our fellow man.

 

TEFILLA BE-TZIBBUR VS. ...

 

            In our siman when and how we say KS is weighed against praying with a minyan:

 

            1. MB implies here (in s.k. 5) what he rules explicitly in 52:7: that davening together with Keriat Shema is better than saying KS before davening and davening later with a minyan; "semikhat ge'ula li-tefilla" is more important than "tefilla be-tzibbur."  MB also acknowledges that saying KS in advance is also a valid solution.  Some shul Rabbis have indeed been known to daven by themselves before the congregation's davening. At the end of MB 5 there is a third suggestion - is this suggestion relevant to a shul Rabbi?

 

            Note that the Shulchan Arukh itself rules (89:8) that it is better to say KS on time - that is, after one can recognize one's fellow - than to daven Shemoneh Esrei adjacent to KS. We see that KS on time is more important than semikhat ge'ula li-tefilla.  And according to the MB, semikhat ge'ula li-tefilla is more important than a minyan.  It certainly follows that davening on time without a minyan is preferable to a very early minyan.  (However, Rav Shlomo Levi, the Rosh Kollel at Har Etzion, has ruled that in the army it is generally better to form a minyan.  The main reason is that experience shows that some soldiers will not daven at all if there is no minyan.)

 

            2. MB rules that one who is accustomed to davening "vatikin" can do so even if this means davening without a minyan (BH s.v. U-mitzva).  The suggestion seems to be that it is preferable to do so.  The source is Berakhot 25b.  The mishna on 22b implies that it is better to say KS in the mikva before sunrise than to say it properly clad afterwards.  The gemara on 25b explains that this is only for "vatikin" who are always careful to say KS before sunrise. 

 

            This source suggests that the "essence" of vatikin is to say KS before sunrise.  The starting of the davening exactly at the moment of sunrise is of secondary importance.  This seems to be in opposition to the gemara (Berakhot 9b) which finds the source of the custom in the verse "They will fear You [referring to prayer] with the sun" (Tehillim 72:5). The verse seems to place the main import on the time of davening itself.  The saying of KS early is only a precondition to davening with the sunrise. To this day we find vatikin minyans which emphasize one or the other of these two aspects.