|
The Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit
Midrash
Mishna Berura Yeshivat Har Etzion
SHIUR
#32: Siman 55, Part 2
Pages
170-177
by
Rav Yosef Zvi Rimon
HOW MANY MUST
RESPOND?
As we have seen, the presence of ten is necessary for a minyan (though
for "devarim she-bikedusha," it is sufficient if only one of them still has not
fulfilled his obligation, and for chazarat ha-shatz, six). Must all ten
respond?
The Hagahot Maimoniot (Hilkhot Tefilla 1:9) writes in the name of the
Maharam that if one member of the minyan is still in the middle of Shemoneh
Esrei, leaving only nine who can respond (actually, he must mean eight, for one
is the chazan), he still is counted together with them, as it is written, "And I
will be sanctified in the midst of Benei Yisrael" - wherever there are ten
members of Benei Yisrael, sanctity rests.
In contrast, the Rosh writes (Responsa, klal 4:19):
"The
congregation should be silent and pay attention to the berakha of the chazan and
respond with amen, and when there are not nine in the synagogue who are paying
attention to the berakha of the shatz, then it appears likely to me that the
berakha of the shatz is in vain, since the berakhot of the sheliach tzibbur were
instituted to be said with ten, so that when there are not nine in the synagogue
paying attention to the berakha of the shatz, it looks like a berakha in
vain."
Put simply, the Rosh rejects the leniency of the Maharam and maintains
that all nine must answer. The
opinion of the Maharam is accepted by the Shulchan Arukh (55:6) as halakha, and
the Mishna Berura (55:32) adds, citing the Elia Rabba and the Derekh Ha-chayim,
that "the same holds true even for more than one, provided that a majority
remains who are not in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei and who can respond with
amen. And there are those who are
stringent when it is more than one...."
Surprisingly, though, the Shulchan Arukh, who codifies the ruling of the
Maharam in 55:6, likewise accepts the statement of the Rosh in
124:4!
The Magen Avraham (55:8) writes as follows in the name of the Maharil
(Responsa, 150): "Even though the Rosh writes that we require nine who are
paying attention to the berakha of the shatz ... we are not accustomed to follow
this, for we see that even one who is talking and not listening - is
counted." (To be sure, the Magen
Avraham limits this scenario to only one.)
However, the Taz writes in 55:4 (about similar matters, in the name of
the Agur): "This is to be wondered at, for how can a proof be brought from
ignoramuses who commit a transgression by interrupting [prayer] with vain
conversation, and whose iniquity is very great? And in truth I say God
forbid to join
with such sinners when there is not a quorum of others... And furthermore, behold that the
Shulchan Arukh has already determined (124:4) ... that if there are not nine who
are paying attention to the words of the shatz during chazarat ha-shatz, it is
likely to be a berakha in vain..."
Neither the Magen Avraham nor the Taz resolve the internal
contradiction. While according to
the Magen Avraham the lenient view expressed in siman 55 is the accepted one,
the Taz agrees with siman 124 that nine are necessary.
We can resolve the contradiction by pointing out that siman 55 deals with
Kaddish, while siman 124 addresses chazarat ha-shatz. One can, accordingly, distinguish
between Kaddish and Kedusha on one hand and chazarat ha-shatz on the other. For Kaddish and Kedusha it is in
principle enough that six answer, but for chazarat ha-shatz nine are needed,
because: (1) chazarat ha-shatz is tefillat HA-tzibbur, which requires full
participation "since the berakhot of the sheliach
tzibbur were instituted to be said with ten," in the words of the Rosh; and (2)
due to the fear of a berakha in vain we require the whole minyan (though it is
permitted with a majority who are obligated) - as written in Shulchan Arukh
Ha-rav (55) and the Emek Berakha (Tefilla, 6). Hence, chazarat ha-shatz needs nine to
respond.
An additional explanation may be offered. There is indeed no distinction between
Kaddish and chazarat ha-shatz; for both we do not need all nine to respond, but
they must be present. In siman 55,
though, there is one person standing in prayer and therefore he cannot
answer. Such a man is dealing with
spiritual matters and is directly involved with prayer, and is therefore to be
considered "present." In contrast,
the man of siman 124 who is chatting and focusing on vain matters cannot be
defined as present since he has removed himself from the framework of the
tefilla, choosing instead to fulfill his own needs. (One who is asleep is in an intermediate
state, with the Shulchan Arukh ruling leniently and the Taz, stringently - as
discussed below.)
This distinction is cited in the Arukh Ha-shulchan (55:13) and in the
Tzitz Eliezer (12:9), and it is quoted as well in the name of the Maharam ben
Barukh (Responsa, 529), who is the source of the Shulchan Arukh's ruling in
siman 55. Thus writes the Maharam
ben Barukh: "This individual, who is also involved in prayer and is accepting
upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, is joined together with them,
and [as a result] the Shekhina joins them." In other words, the reason for the
leniency is that he too is praying, unlike the talker who is not paying
attention.
According to this, one who is praying can be counted for a minyan during
chazarat ha-shatz as well.
Apparently, even four should be; however, even the lenient opinions write
that only one should be joined (Chayei Adam 29:1; Emek Berakha, Tefilla,
6).
In practice, it is always preferable to have nine to respond. For Kaddish and Kedusha it is possible
to wait for only six; for chazarat ha-shatz it is possible when necessary to be
lenient if one is still praying (if there are eight others and a shatz). In a case of great need, one can rely
upon the opinion that only six are necessary, but the shatz should stipulate to
himself that if this is not in fact counted as a chazarat ha-shatz, then it
should be considered a "tefillat nedava" - a voluntary additional prayer; see
M.B. 124:19. [This should be done
as well by one who finds himself in a minyan where he fears that the majority is
not responding. In such a case, it
is at times preferable for the shatz to pray aloud during the silent amida until
the end of the third berakha, saying Kedusha but not continuing aloud
afterwards; this is known as a "short chazarat ha-shatz."]
Our discussion thus far has been purely halakhic, assessing the laws of
tefilla and berakhot. Yet, there is
another aspect to this issue which must be considered.
Writes the Shulchan Arukh (55:7) in accordance with the Hagahot
Maimoniot: "When one is praying
alone, it is correct for the others to wait for him and not say Kaddish until he
finishes, in order that he too have this merit." Thus, even when there is a quorum who
can respond, it is desirable to wait for everyone.
However, the Rema (124:3) writes in accordance with the Responsa Binyamin
Ze'ev: "If there are individuals in the congregation who draw out their tefilla,
the shatz should not wait for them, even if they are important public
figures."
It appears that the difference is between one who prays slightly longer
than the average, who should be waited for, and one whose prayer takes a
significantly longer period of time ("draws out his prayer," in the words of the
Rema), who should not be waited for.
This is written in the Shulchan Arukh Ha-rav 55:9.
ONE WHO IS
ASLEEP:
Writes the Beit Yosef (55, s.v. Katuv ba-hagahot):
"And from here
[the ruling of the Maharam that one who is in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei is
counted], my teacher the great rav R. Yaakov Berav, may his memory be blessed
for life in the World to Come, learns that one who is asleep is counted together
with nine for Kaddish and Kedusha, for since there are ten, which is a number
considered qualified for Kedusha, then the Shekhina can rest upon
them."
The Beit Yosef goes on to say that he found this in the Agur as well
(siman 267), and he concludes, "And my teacher of blessed memory is worthy of
being relied upon." He also rules
this way in the Shulchan Arukh 55:6.
However, the Taz (55:4) disagrees and rules that one who is asleep cannot
be counted, since his soul leaves him and holiness cannot rest upon him; in fact
the opposite is the case - impurity rests upon him. The Peri Chadash agrees. See M.B. 55:34 and the Biur Halakha
(s.v. O She-hu Yashen), who rules that it is preferable le-khat'chila to awaken
him, and be-di'avad, according to the Peri Megadim who relies upon the Shulchan
Arukh, it is acceptable. However,
from the Biur Halakha it appears that for chazarat ha-shatz it is not a good
idea to include the sleeping person because of the fear of a berakha in vain,
though he can be counted - be-di'avad - for Kaddish and Kedusha.
(This
shiur was translated by Pnina Baumgarten.) |