Tefillas HaDerech
[1] (Halacha 269)
Question: What is the source of the enactment of Tefillas HaDerech?
Answer: In Maseches Brochos we find two Gemaros dealing with Tefillas HaDerech, and in the following halacha we will deal with the relationship between the two Gemaros.
In the chapter Tefillas HaShachar1 it is brought: 'And Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rav Chisda: Whoever goes out on the road must recite Tefillas HaDerech. What is Tefillas HaDerech? May it be Your will, Hashem my G-d, that You lead me in peace, direct my steps in peace, support me in peace, and rescue me from the hand of every enemy and ambush along the way, and send blessing in the work of my hands, and grant me grace, kindness, and mercy in Your eyes and in the eyes of all who see me; Blessed are You Hashem, who hears prayer.'
And in the chapter HaRoeh2 it is brought: 'One who enters a walled city. Our Rabbis taught .. When he wishes to leave, he says: May it be Your will, Hashem my G-d and G-d of my fathers, that You take me out of this city in peace. When he has left, he says: I thank You, Hashem my G-d, that You took me out of this city in peace; and just as You took me out in peace, so lead me in peace, support me in peace, direct my steps in peace, and rescue me from the hand of every enemy and ambush along the way. Rav Masna said: They taught this only regarding a city in which judgments and executions are not carried out, but a city in which judgments and executions are carried out—we have no concern with it. There are those who say, Rav Masna said: Even in a city in which judgments and executions are carried out, sometimes a person who can plead his defense may not be present for him.'
Now the Rambam3 wrote: 'And when he wishes to leave he says: May it be Your will, Hashem my G-d, that You take me out of this city in peace; and if he has left in peace he says: I thank You, Hashem my G-d, that You took me out of this city in peace, and just as You took me out in peace so lead me in peace, direct my steps in peace, support me in peace, and rescue me from the hand of enemy and ambush along the way.'
And the Bais Yosef4 wrote: 'And one must wonder why he did not mention in it a closing [bracha], and also why he did not write that one recites it from when he set out on the road until a parsah.'
The Or HaChaim5 wrote to explain that the Rambam holds that there is in fact a dispute between the two Gemaros that were brought, and the Rambam ruled in accordance with the words of the braisa on daf 60, which states that one recites the tefillah without a concluding bracha with the Name, and not in accordance with the words of the Amoraim on daf 29 that there is a bracha formula; and this is his language: 'I choose to say that the Rambam holds that from this braisa in the chapter HaRoeh, which teaches the formula of Tefillas HaDerech without a closing [bracha], as it is taught in its place, which is the primary one—the words of Rav Chisda who said that a bracha is required were rejected; and Rav Chisda did not hear this braisa, for had he heard it he would have retracted.'
However, the rest of the Rishonim6 mentioned the bracha with a closing at its end. And so ruled the Mechaber and the Alter Rebbe7, that Tefillas HaDerech is concluded with a bracha.
Question: According to the rest of the Rishonim and the Shulchan Aruch, does one recite, in addition to Tefillas HaDerech, also the tefillah brought in the Gemara for one leaving a walled city, or do both statements speak about the same tefillah?
The Tur8 wrote: 'When he wishes to leave he says: May it be Your will, Hashem my G-d, that You take me out of this city in peace. When he has left in peace he says: I thank You, Hashem my G-d, that You took me out of this city in peace; and just as You took me out in peace, so lead me in peace, support me in peace, direct my steps in peace, and rescue me from the hand of every enemy and ambush along the way.
And the Bais Yosef there raised a difficulty: 'And Tefillas HaDerech with its closing and all its laws our teacher wrote in Siman 110. And from the plain sense of the sugyos it appears that they required one to pray for the safety of the road twice—once at the time he leaves the city, in which he does not close [with a bracha], which is the [teaching] of the chapter HaRoeh, and another in which he does close, as stated at the end of the chapter Tefillas HaShachar9. And one must wonder: why do I need both? It would have been fitting to institute a closing in the one he prays when he has left in peace, and that would suffice.'
And so ruled the Mechaber10, who, after the aforementioned law from the chapter HaRoeh, wrote: 'And this is Tefillas HaDerech, which, together with all its laws, was written in Siman 110.'
That is to say, according to the words of the Mechaber the two Gemaros combine into one tefillah for one who sets out on the road.
But the Bach there wrote: 'In my humble opinion it is clear that the [teaching] of the chapter HaRoeh is not related to Tefillas HaDerech of the chapter Tefillas HaShachar; for there in the chapter Tefillas HaShachar it speaks of one who initially sets out on the road, who must recite Tefillas HaDerech and close it with "Blessed are You Hashem, who hears prayer." This tefillah was originally instituted only for ordinary travelers … but apart from this tefillah, if his way passed through some walled city or several walled cities, he requires another tefillah before he enters the walled city .. and one upon his departure. He prays that he leave in peace .. for there are two tefillos, one with a closing and one without a closing, on two [different] matters.'
And the Taz11 wrote: that one who leaves a walled city 'then requires two tefillos, one for leaving the walled city and another for the road; regarding this he said that he should make of the two tefillos one and close it, as written here. But if he dwells in a city that is not a walled city and there is no fear at all in leaving the city, only that he must recite Tefillas HaDerech on account of the fear of the road, and on the day he travels he travels through a walled city and does not lodge there—consequently, when he leaves there he need not recite Tefillas HaDerech, since it is on that same day, but he must recite the tefillah stated here on account of his leaving the walled city; then he recites it as written here without a closing. All this appears to be the plain intent of the Bais Yosef and the Shulchan Aruch and the Kol Bo.'
His intent is to say that although according to the Mechaber one sometimes combines the tefillah together, there are cases in which one recites this tefillah separately, such as one who passes on his way through a city in the middle of the road, who does not recite Tefillas HaDerech (since he already recited it in the morning) but must recite this tefillah when he leaves the city.
But the Aruch HaShulchan there wrote: 'Nowadays we are not accustomed to this, since Rashi z"l explained that it is because in a walled city false accusations are common (see there), and in our times this does not apply; nonetheless, one who is careful with the words of Chazal—it is proper to recite it, especially since there is no bracha in it that we would be concerned about a bracha in vain12.'
In practice, it is not the custom to recite the request brought in the chapter HaRoeh, and one recites only Tefillas HaDerech.
Notes:
1 29b ↩
2 60a ↩
3 Hilchos Brochos ch. 10, halacha 25 ↩
4 Siman 110. And see what the Pri Chadash wrote to resolve this in Siman 110 s.k. 4 ↩
5 In his sefer Rishon L'Tzion on the Gemara 29b ↩
6 The Rif ch. 4, 20a. The Rosh ch. 4 Siman 18. And others ↩
7 Shulchan Aruch OC Siman 110 se'if 7 ↩
8 OC Siman 230 ↩
9 29b ↩
10 Shulchan Aruch OC Siman 230 ↩
11 s.k. 1, and see Magen Avraham s.k. 3 ↩
12 And see Chayei Adam vol. 1 klal 64 se'if 4 and Mishnah Berurah Siman 230 s.k. 2 ↩
[2] (Halacha 270)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of the shliach Rabbi Sholom DovBer שיחי', son of R' Meir z"l, for his birthday
Question: In our times, when many of the roads are not desolate places and there are many vehicles and the concern of bandits has decreased, does one recite Tefillas HaDerech?
Answer: We find that several of the poskim were somewhat in doubt about the law of reciting Tefillas HaDerech with Hashem's Name in our times, as follows:
In the Tehillah L'David1 he wrote: 'One must know whether one must recite Tefillas HaDerech when traveling on the railroad tracks; seemingly this bracha was instituted for the danger of bandits, as the formula of the bracha is "and rescue us from the hand of every enemy and ambush etc.," and this is not so applicable on the railroad tracks. And if we were to say that the danger is from an obstacle on the road, G-d forbid, then even for less than a parsah one would need to recite it.'
And in the Ketzos HaShulchan2 he wrote: 'Now, from the plain statement of the poskim it appears that one must recite Tefillas HaDerech even if the road is not a desolate place but rather planted with gardens and orchards, since there is no settlement where people dwell it is called a road. And seemingly … one who immediately reaches gardens and orchards - … is no longer presumed to be in danger like one traveling on a desolate road; and according to this it is possible that on a road of gardens and orchards one need not recite Tefillas HaDerech. But since this matter is not mentioned in the poskim, it appears that there is no distinction regarding Tefillas HaDerech, and whoever leaves the city must pray. And even though logic dictates that this is not a dangerous road, since the road is settled with gardens and orchards there is no danger of wild beasts, which are not found in a settlement—nonetheless the danger of bandits applies to any road in which there is no human dwelling. However, it is possible that Tefillas HaDerech was instituted only in a case where all the dangers apply, both from wild beasts and from bandits, as written in the formula of the tefillah, and this requires further study.'
And in the Shu"t Minchas Shlomo3 he wrote: 'And regarding the essence of the matter I am in doubt, for on those highways and in those times when vehicles are common, and all the more so if there is also police patrol supervision, it may be that it is good to recite it without saying the closing; but this is a novelty'4.
And likewise in the Shu"t Or L'Tzion5 he wrote: that one recites Tefillas HaDerech only 'when traveling from city to city on a highway where the distance between one vehicle and another is great, such that this vehicle does not see another vehicle, such as on highways where the traffic of cars is sparse, or one who travels at the late hours of the night.' And see also in the Shu"t Olas Yitzchak6 (concerning HaGomel): 'that even on long journeys the roads are full of cars traveling, and it turns out that their law is like those traveling within the settlement itself; and as for road accidents, G-d forbid, this applies also within the city itself just as outside the city.'
But on the other hand, many of the poskim wrote that even when, thank G-d, there is no concern of "bandits and wild beasts" as in our times, one must recite Tefillas HaDerech with Hashem's Name, as written in the Aruch HaShulchan7: 'And it is obvious that one must recite Tefillas HaDerech when traveling on the sea or on rivers or on the railroad tracks8, and if he wishes to add there additional supplications and requests he has permission to do so; but Tefillas HaDerech of the Gemara he is obligated to recite on every kind of travel that there is'9.
And in the Nimukei OC10 he wrote: 'Many are lenient with themselves in our times regarding reciting Tefillas HaDerech, saying that the roads are not dangerous now, and especially when traveling on the "bahn" (train); but in truth their words are vanity … and also on the steam trains, from the collision of the cars and the machines or their overturning and their going off the track (that is, from all of these), and especially on the automobiles, which pose more danger to life than all the wagons—Hashem should protect us—therefore certainly one requires Tefillas HaDerech.'
And regarding the reason for this, he wrote to explain in the Teshuvos V'Hanhagos11: 'And the primary reason that one should recite it is because road accidents are common today, and even if he himself is careful in his driving, his fellow is not careful; and although the danger exists also in the city, nonetheless since Chazal did not institute it in the city we should not change; but on the road, where they instituted a bracha, and accidents apply today, the law of Tefillas HaDerech remains. And similar to this is the Kiddush in the synagogue on Shabbos night—we do not practice it because today there are no guests who eat in the synagogue and the enactment was nullified; but the chazzan's repetition, although today we are expert, nonetheless applies to one who did not concentrate properly, that he fulfills through the chazzan, and the enactment remains'12.
And it may be said that in our formula13, in which we say "and from all calamities that rage and come upon the world," all the calamities are included, including road accidents, Hashem should protect us14. And as the Yerushalmi writes15, 'that all roads are presumed to be dangerous,' and the Rishonim explained16 that this refers to Tefillas HaDerech.
Therefore, in practice, even in our times, on the new modes of travel, one should recite Tefillas HaDerech.
Notes:
1 ch. 28 verse 20 ↩
2 ch. 10 verse 35 ↩
3 See Daas Zekeinim. Bechor Shor on the verse ↩
4 ch. 8 verse 21. And verse 31 ↩
5 29b ↩
6 by Rabbi Eliezer Papo - Siman 110 s.k. 2 ↩
7 by Rabbi Moshe Reichman - os 32 ↩
8 And see also Likutei Mahari'ach, Seder Tefillas HaDerech p. 154. Yalkut Yosef Tefillah 2 Siman 110 os 3 ↩
9 Likkut Ma'anos 5751 p. 213 ↩
10 by Rabbi Mordechai Yehuda Leib Winkler - Shu"t YD new edition Siman 35 ↩
11 And see also Yalkut Yosef Dinim L'Isha U'L'Vas chapter 12 - se'if 6 ↩
12 And see also his words in vol. 1 Siman 199, and in Shu"t Shevet HaLevi vol. 10 Siman 21. And so wrote the Yalkut Yosef Tefillah 2 notes to Siman 110 os 2. And see Shu"t Yaskil Avdi vol. 7 p. 306 ↩
13 Based on Maseches Derech Eretz Rabba, chapter HaYotzei, halacha 18 ↩
14 And see in Shu"t Ma'amar Mordechai (by Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu) vol. 3 OC Siman 5, who wrote that the words 'ambush along the way' - these are all the accidents that lie in ambush on the roads. And in Piskei Teshuvos Siman 110 note 15 he wrote: 'And the enemy, the one who ambushes, and the wild beasts also refer to those human beasts who endanger the lives of others with coarseness and contempt through their reckless driving, and they are in the category of enemies and ambushers' ↩
15 Brochos ch. 4 halacha 4 ↩
16 Tur OC Siman 219 ↩
[4] (Halacha 272)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in memory of the shliach, the gaon and chassid, Rabbi Aryeh Leib son of Moshe Binyamin a"h Kaplan for his yahrzeit.
Question: Does one recite the formula of the bracha in the singular or in the plural?
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Brochos1 states: 'Abaye said: A person should always associate himself with the community.' [And Rashi explained: He should not recite a short tefillah in the singular but in the plural, for through this his tefillah is heard.] How should one say it? - May it be Your will, Hashem our G-d, that You lead us in peace etc.'.
And the Rishonim disputed about this: In the Orchos Chaim2 he wrote: 'And all these tefillos it is fitting to recite in the plural if there are companions with him.' That is to say, the Gemara's intent is with regard to a person who travels on the road with other people, and although it is possible for each one to recite the formula in the singular, regarding this Abaye said that it is preferable to recite it in the plural; but in a case where a person travels alone on the road, he certainly recites it in the singular.
But in the sefer HaEshkol3 he wrote: 'And he recites it in the plural, as Abaye said .. and even though he travels alone, several others are traveling on other roads.' That is to say, even a person who travels on the road alone recites the formula of the bracha in the plural; and although he travels alone, nonetheless in his tefillah he includes also the other travelers who are traveling on the roads at that time, for surely there is some Jew somewhere in the world who is traveling on the road, as the Magen Avraham wrote4: 'And likewise we say in Siman 110 that one who sets out on the road, even alone, says "that You lead us in peace," because it is impossible that there not be one at the end of the world who is likewise traveling on the road.'
In practice, the Tur and the Mechaber5 wrote in accordance with the words of the Baal HaEshkol: 'And one must recite it in the plural.' That even an individual recites the formula in the plural. And so wrote the Alter Rebbe in the Shulchan Aruch6 and in the Siddur.
However, this law is l'chatchilah, but in a case where one already recited it in the singular, he has fulfilled his obligation, as the Olas Tamid wrote7: 'And it appears to me that if he recited it in the singular he has fulfilled it b'dieved, only that it is preferable to recite it in the plural so that his tefillah may be heard.'
Question: What about the words "and grant me grace, kindness, and mercy" - is it said in the plural or the singular?
Answer: In the sefer HaKaneh8 he wrote: 'And one says it in the plural to include also the angels who travel with him, for there are angels corresponding to them; and afterward one says "and grant me grace, kindness, and mercy" in the singular, for it is he who engages in acts of kindness.'
Thus, according to the sefer HaKaneh, reciting the bracha in the plural includes the angels who accompany the person, and nonetheless the word "grant me" one says in the singular, since it is a request from Hashem that He grant us grace and kindness, and this applies specifically to the person and not to the angels, for the person is the one who engages in acts of kindness, and not the angels.
And the Magen Avraham wrote9: 'In the plural. Specifically a tefillah fixed for the many, as written in Siman 565 end of se'if 1; but the word "and grant me grace" one says in the singular (so wrote the sefer HaKaneh according to the secret [teaching]).'
It is explained in his words: a. that the insistence on the formula being in the plural is specifically in the fixed formula of the tefillah that Chazal instituted, and not in the private addition that one is permitted to add, in which he may recite in the singular. b. The word "and grant me," although it is part of the formula fixed for the many, nonetheless according to the sefer HaKaneh one recites it in the singular.
And this is the language of the Alter Rebbe in the Shulchan Aruch10: 'One who sets out on the road must recite Tefillas HaDerech, which is "May it be Your will, Hashem our G-d and G-d of our fathers, that You lead us in peace etc.," and even if he travels alone he recites it in the plural, for through this his tefillah is heard; and if he comes to add to it words of supplication he may recite them in the singular, since it is not part of the fixed text of the bracha that they established as an obligation for the many (and there is one who says that according to the secret [teaching] one should say the word "and grant me grace" in the singular even though it is part of the fixed text of the bracha established for the many).'
In the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe, in the first edition, the wording is "vesitneinu" (and grant us)11 in the plural, but in the gloss of the Tzemach Tzedek on his Siddur12 it is written that one should say "vesitneini" (and grant me) in the singular13.
In practice, we say "vesitneini" in the singular, in accordance with the gloss of the Tzemach Tzedek14, and as is brought in the Sefer HaMinhogim15, and so it is printed in the Chabad siddurim.
Notes:
1 30a ↩
2 Siman 110 s.k. 8 ↩
3 Brochos 20b. And so wrote the Rosh ch. 4 Siman 18 ↩
4 Brochos 20b ↩
5 OC Siman 110 ↩
6 But see what is written in Ma'adanei Yom Tov, Maseches Brochos chapter 4 Siman 18 os reish ↩
7 OC Siman 110 s.k. 4 ↩
8 on the Rif there, os 1 ↩
9 Siman 110 s.k. 11 ↩
10 Siman 110 se'if 4 ↩
11 And see below for an additional possibility for understanding the words of the Alter Rebbe here ↩
12 (Botchatch) Siman 110 ↩
13 vol. 2 ch. 45 note 36 ↩
14 Who wrote: 'One sitting in a wagon .. to halt the horses if it is possible for him,' and likewise from the fact that regarding Krias Shema (in Siman 63 se'if 4, and see there in the mareh mekomos also regarding Shemoneh Esrei) he wrote that one need not halt the wagon on account of kavana, and on the other hand regarding Tefillas HaDerech he wrote that one must halt the wagon if possible, and did not mention at all the matter of kavana, it is understood that the primary reason for stopping is not because of kavana but the obligation to stand still from traveling, and if so it is not on account of distraction ↩
15 p. 23 ↩
[6] (Halacha 274)
The study of this halacha is dedicated to all the participants of the Lag BaOmer parades in honor of the hilula of Rashbi
Yesterday we learned that when possible it is worthwhile to stop the traveling/walking and recite Tefillas HaDerech.
Question: Apart from the stopping itself, is there also a preference to physically stand while reciting Tefillas HaDerech?
The Rokeach wrote1: 'And the halacha is that Tefillas HaDerech may be recited whether standing, sitting, or walking; however, the mitzvah is [to do so] standing.' And the Eliyah Rabba brought this2.
And the plain sense of his words indicates that "standing" means3 not only stopping from walking but standing on one's feet and not sitting4.
And so wrote the Baal Or HaChaim5: 'Rav Sheshes said even walking—it appears specifically walking, but sitting not. And although sitting is considered more [respectful] than walking, and it is obvious and so it is explained explicitly in the words of Rabbeinu Yona, nonetheless in our case one who is sitting must stand. And the reason is: granted that walking, they did not trouble him to stand still from walking along his path for several reasons; not so when he is sitting, it is obvious that we say to him "stand," for the time in which he sits, let him stand and pray. And that [statement] of Rav Sheshes who said "since it is good" means specifically that they were walking. And regarding this Rashi was precise and said, in the d"h "since it is good etc.," to pray while walking, understand this. And in my humble opinion it appears one may explain in another manner, namely that Rav Sheshes was sitting, and this is what he says: say that they said one need not stand—this is specifically walking, but sitting one must stand, for "since it is good, do not read it as bad," and these are our own words, understand this.'
And so wrote the Aruch HaShulchan6: 'And it is good to recite it standing rather than sitting; however, if he was riding on an animal they did not trouble him to descend from it, and he recites it while riding; but if it is possible for him he should halt the animal, for riding is like walking. And likewise when he sits in a wagon they did not trouble him to descend, and he recites it while sitting in the wagon; and if it is easy to halt the horses it is proper to do so. And those traveling in the railroad cars should recite it standing, for there it is easy to stand; and likewise when traveling in large ships'7.
And the Alter Rebbe wrote in the Shulchan Aruch8: 'And in any case one need only stand still from walking; but if he was riding he need not descend, but rather should halt the animal from walking if it is possible for him, for if he rides he is like one walking (and the same applies to one sitting in a wagon, who need not descend but should halt the horses if it is possible for him).'
The plain sense of the words of the Alter Rebbe is that one need not stand9.
And in the Siddur the Alter Rebbe wrote: 'And it is good to recite it standing if it is easily possible'10.
Regarding the practice of the Rebbe Rashab: the Rebbe Rayatz related the practice of his father11: The order of the service of my father, the holy Rebbe, at the time of the journey to the summer home .. he would command [the driver] to stop and he would wash his hands and pray Tefillas HaDerech. Tefillas HaDerech in the wagon my father the holy Rebbe would pray sitting, and in the railroad car - standing'12. And in Likkutei Dibburim13: 'And my father commanded the driver to stop; my father descends from the carriage and goes off to the side among the trees of the forest, and comes back and washes his hands, recites a bracha, and proceeds to recite Birchas HaDerech word by word, so that I too could recite it after him by heart.'
Regarding the practice of the Rebbe: In the sefer Naos Deshe14 it is related regarding the Rebbe's journey to camp in the year 5717 that in the middle of the road they stopped at a gas station to recite Tefillas HaDerech; the Rebbe exited the car, washed his hands, and recited Tefillas HaDerech standing while facing east. And further on it is related there15 regarding the journey in the year 5720 that there too they stopped, the Rebbe exited the car, washed his hands, and recited Tefillas HaDerech standing.
Thus we have seen in the Rebbe's practice regarding Tefillas HaDerech: a. stopping the vehicle b. washing the hands c. reciting Tefillas HaDerech standing
Notes:
1 Hilchos Brochos Siman 347 ↩
2 Siman 110 s.k. 10 ↩
3 A clarification: in the words of the poskim brought yesterday who required 'standing,' one could understand that their intent was to stop from walking, and not necessarily the position of the body, whether standing or sitting. And now in this halacha we will discuss whether there is significance that one must also actually stand ↩
4 Rabbeinu Yona, Brochos 20b, wrote: 'And regarding the tefillah of one going out on the road, the commentators disputed: there is one who says that if he was riding he need not descend and pray, since regarding Shemoneh Esrei they said that he should not descend, all the more so in this one; and there is one who says that it may be argued that regarding Shemoneh Esrei, which requires more kavana, they said that he should not descend since his mind is not settled, but in this tefillah, which does not require so much kavana, and we are not concerned about the settling of his mind, he must descend. From the mouth of my teacher the Rav.' And from the words of the second view it appears that regarding Tefillas HaDerech there is a need to descend from the animal and stand. And even according to the first view - whose words are the halacha as explained in the Bais Yosef and the Shulchan Aruch (and see also in the words of the Alter Rebbe) - that one need not descend and stand is only because the descent disturbs his kavana, but in principle one should stand, and seemingly one can also understand thus the words of the Levush Siman 110 se'if 4 ↩
5 in his sefer Cheftz Hashem on Maseches Brochos 30a ↩
6 Siman 110 se'if 11 ↩
7 And so wrote the Or L'Tzion vol. 2 ch. 45 halacha 36 and in the notes there. And in Shu"t Ma'amar Mordechai vol. 3 OC Siman 5. Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 3 Siman 76, vol. 5 Siman 46 ↩
8 Siman 110 se'if 4 ↩
9 But see Pri Megadim, Eshel Avraham, Siman 110 s.k. 11: 'And there we wrote in the Taz [os] 4 that sitting is worse than walking .. and here they did not permit him both, sitting and walking at once, for riding is like walking.' And if so, according to his words seemingly on a train or the like, when one recites it while traveling, one should stand when possible ↩
10 In the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe with the notes of Rabbi Raskin p. 200 note 4 he was in doubt as to the intent of the words. And in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav with the notes of Rabbi R.A. note 42 he wrote that it appears from the words of the Alter Rebbe that it is good to stand and not to sit. And this still requires study ↩
11 Introduction to Kuntres U'Ma'ayan p. 34, brought in the Sefer HaMinhogim p. 23 ↩
12 In the notes of Rabbi R.A. there os 43 he noted that this practice accords with what the Pri Megadim wrote, which is in note 9 ↩
13 vol. 4 p. 1375 (in the Hebrew edition vol. 3-4 p. 928) ↩
14 p. 47 ↩
15 on page 84 ↩
[7] (Halacha 275)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of Mrs. Chana Mushka bas Rochel for her birthday
Question: What is the length of the journey that obligates one to recite Tefillas HaDerech?
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Brochos1 states: 'When does one recite it? Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rav Chisda: from the time he walks on the road. Until when? Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rav Chisda: until a parsah.'
And Rashi explained: 'a) But not after he has walked a parsah, b) And in the Halachos Gedolos it is explained: until how far does he wish to go, such that he must pray - up to a parsah; even if he has only to go up to a parsah. But for a journey of less than a parsah - one need not recite this tefillah.'
c) An additional approach we find in the students of Rabbeinu Yona2, who agreed with Rashi's explanation but not with his ruling: 'It appears to my teacher the Rav that certainly the correct explanation is thus: "until how far" means "until how far is [the point of] setting out on the road"; but it is not as some say, that if he did not pray within the parsah he should not pray afterward, for this cannot be, for as long as he still has to walk he is obligated in the required tefillah. Rather, he should recite it l'chatchilah after he leaves the city, within the first parsah; and if he forgot and did not recite it within the first, he recites it afterward for the [remaining distance] he has to walk, as long as much of the road remains for him, until he draws near to the place he is going.'
Thus Rashi explains that one should recite Tefillas HaDerech only within the first parsah of the road. But he brought that the Behag explained that one recites the tefillah only when he has a road of the length of a parsah or more; but if the road is less than a parsah he does not recite Tefillas HaDerech. And Rabbeinu Yona learns that l'chatchilah one should recite it within the first parsah, but if he did not recite it he may recite it afterward.
The Rosh3 ruled in accordance with the view of the Behag, and this is his language: 'And it appears that the explanation of the Halachos Gedolos is primary: if he still has much to walk, why should he not recite a bracha? But when he has to walk less than a parsah, close to the city, it is not a place of danger and he need not recite a bracha.'
The Tur wrote4: 'And one should recite it only if he has to walk a parsah; but for less than a parsah he should not close with Boruch; and if he forgot to recite it he may recite it as long as he is on the road, provided he has not reached within a parsah adjacent to the city in which he wishes to lodge; from there on he recites it without a bracha.'
That is, the Tur added: a. that even if he walks less than a parsah he may recite Tefillas HaDerech, only that in such a case he should not conclude with Boruch. b. If he did not recite it until he has already reached the parsah adjacent to the city in which he stops his travel and lodges there, he recites it without a bracha5.
In practice: The Mechaber ruled in accordance with the Behag and the words of the Tur, and this is his language6: 'And one should recite it only if he has to walk a parsah, but for less than a parsah he should not close with Boruch; and if he forgot to recite it, he may recite it as long as he is on the road, provided he has not reached within a parsah adjacent to the city in which he wishes to lodge, and from there on he recites it without a bracha.' And the Rema there in the gloss wrote that one must, l'chatchilah, take into account the view of Rashi, and this is his language: 'And l'chatchilah he should recite it in the first parsah.'
And this is the language of the Alter Rebbe7: 'They instituted Tefillas HaDerech only when he has to walk a parsah, which is 8,000 amos, for less than a parsah, close to the city, is presumably not a place of danger. And if he wishes to recite it on a journey of less than a parsah he should not close with Boruch (Atah Hashem) .. And there is one who says that they instituted Tefillas HaDerech only at the beginning of the road, which is the first parsah; and one should take their words into account l'chatchilah to recite it in the first parsah; and if he forgot to recite it he may recite it as long as he is on the road, provided he has not reached within a parsah adjacent to the city in which he wishes to lodge, and from there on he recites it without a bracha.'
Thus: a. one recites Tefillas HaDerech only when the road is at least a parsah. b. L'chatchilah one should recite it in the first parsah. c. If he has reached the parsah adjacent to the city in which he stops his travel to sleep, he recites it without a bracha.
Question: What is the law when there is danger even on a journey of less than a parsah from the city?
Answer: Rabbeinu Yona wrote8 on the view of the Behag that one recites it only on a long road of at least a parsah: 'And some raise a difficulty against him from what we say in the Yerushalmi that all roads are presumed to be dangerous. And one can say that this [that less than a parsah is not dangerous] does not apply close to the city, but rather when he travels on the road between the villages, where all is presumed to be dangerous, and he must pray and beseech for his life.'
And the Taz wrote9: 'It is implied from this that one who travels in a place of danger should recite Tefillas HaDerech even for less than a parsah, for we go according to the reason; and there is further proof from what is written in Siman 219 regarding Birchas HaGomel in this [matter], even for less than a parsah, and all the more so in this.' And so wrote the Olas Tamid10: 'It is implied from this that if he lodged or dwells in a village and travels from there to another village, even for less than a parsah he must recite Tefillas HaDerech.'
And this is the language of the Alter Rebbe11: 'If it is a place presumed to be dangerous he must recite it even for less than a parsah.'
Thus, in a place that, G-d forbid, is presumed to be dangerous, even on a journey of less than a parsah one should recite Tefillas HaDerech with the bracha [containing] the Name.
Notes:
1 30a ↩
2 Brochos 20b of the pages of the Rif ↩
3 Brochos ch. 4 Siman 18 ↩
4 OC Siman 110 ↩
5 But see what the Tiferes Shmuel on the Rosh there os 20 wrote, and in the Birkei Yosef Siman 110 s.k. 11 ↩
6 OC Siman 110 se'if 7 ↩
7 Siman 110 se'if 8 ↩
8 Brochos [page] shin ↩
9 there s.k. 6. And Siman 219 s.k. 4 ↩
10 Siman 110 se'if 7 ↩
11 there ↩
[8] (Halacha 276)
Question: From when may one recite the tefillah?
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Brochos1 states: 'When does one recite it? - Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rav Chisda: from the time he walks2 on the road.'
And the Mechaber wrote3: 'One recites it after he has set out on the road.'
But the Acharonim disputed what is called "he has set out on the road":
Some wrote that one may recite it in the city before leaving on the road, and moreover some wrote that even at home when he is preparing to leave, and this is the language of the Ateres Zekeinim4: 'And it appears to me that even though he has [only] prepared himself to travel on the road and has not yet walked, one may recite Tefillas HaDerech .. And so it is proper to do if he has only one exact parsah to walk, then he should recite Tefillas HaDerech in his house so that after the bracha of Tefillas HaDerech he walks a full parsah.'
And the Taz wrote5: 'that he should not delay reciting it beyond the first parsah, and he may recite it even in the city before he sets out on the road; and what is written "that he set out on the road" means that he is certainly presumed to be going. And I have seen some who are particular not to recite it until he is specifically outside the city in the field, and this has no root or basis in any of the explanations .. But nonetheless it appears that the reason they pray it outside the city is because then he recites it with others, and the merit of the many is preferable; nonetheless he should be careful to recite in the house the tefillah of one leaving the walled city mentioned in Siman 230.'
And the Chida wrote6: 'And according to this it seemingly appears that we can readily explain … that the intent is that he has already gone out from the doors of his house, and its beginning is with a step as he goes out the gate of the town; and even while he is still in the city he may indeed recite a bracha; and also according to the version of the Rif and the Rosh z"l, "from the time he set out on the road," it can be resolved thus .. And also the words of the Rav Taz z"l can be explained that his whole [point] came only to exclude those particular ones who [insist on] reciting it outside the city in the field.'
But some wrote that one should recite it specifically outside the city, and this is the language of the Shelah7: 'Is not the law that one recites Tefillas HaDerech only when he has set out on the road .. And one cannot say that this is called "on the road," when the horse is ready and he has prepared himself to travel even though he is not yet traveling—this is not so, for who knows whether suddenly a cause will arise that he is detained and does not travel, and it turns out the tefillah is in vain and the bracha in vain. Rather, perforce its explanation is that he has actually set out on the road, that he is on the road .. And what I wrote, that one must specifically set out on the road and be on the road, this is on the first day of his going out to the city; but afterward it is always called "he has set out on the road," even when he is at the inn. And so wrote the Be'er Sheva8:
And "outside the city" means specifically after he has left the ibbur of the city, as written in the Emek Bracha9: 'And he should recite it when he has set out somewhat on the road, that is, the techum from the ibbur of the city.'
And so wrote the Magen Avraham10: 'It appears to me that they should not recite it within the ibbur of the city, that is, within 70 amos and a remainder from the city, for the ibbur of the town is like the town, as we say in Nedarim .. And in the Emek HaBracha it is written that it is the techum from the ibbur of the city.'
In practice, the Acharonim ruled11 that l'chatchilah one must recite it outside the ibbur12 of the city, but b'dieved if he recited it within the city he has fulfilled his obligation, and this is the language of the Eliyah Zuta13: 'The Nachalas Tzvi and the Olas Tamid and the Be'er Sheva explained that from the fact that it says "he set out on the road," that is to exclude reciting it in his house before he sets out on the road .. And the Olas Tamid concluded that one may be in doubt whether even b'dieved he does not fulfill [his obligation] with what he recited in his house .. So the expression "he set out on the road" is when he is still in the city. And likewise I found in an old worn manuscript in the margin of a Shulchan Aruch in the name of the Maharash in [the name of] the Maharal that even though he is still in the city, when he has prepared himself to travel he may recite the bracha, that is all. And the language of the Tashbetz Siman 244: if he has to walk a parsah and forgot to recite it, he may recite it up to a parsah, that is all—it implies somewhat that when he has left the city it is [considered] forgetting .. Therefore it appears that in any case he fulfills [his obligation] b'dieved.'
And this is the language of the Alter Rebbe14: 'From when does one pray it? From the time he walks on the road, but not while he is still within the city in which he dwells, for one should not recite Tefillas HaDerech until he has set out on the road; and the ibbur of the city, which is 70 amos and a remainder near the city, is like within the city. And there is one who permits it even within the city, from the time he resolved in his heart and prepared himself to leave that same day, for this too is called "he set out on the road," in that he is presumed to certainly be going; and one may rely on his words b'dieved (and according to all opinions, when he is on the road he may recite it within the city in which he lodges, since he has already set out and is traveling on the road and is still upon it, for in this city he is only a guest who turned in to lodge).'
Thus the Acharonim disputed whether one must wait to recite it until he leaves the techum of the ibbur of the city, or [may recite it] even within the city from the time he leaves his house, or even in his house when he is preparing to leave; but the halacha in practice is that one recites Tefillas HaDerech when one is at a distance of about 34 meters from the end of the city.
Notes:
1 30a ↩
2 The Ma'adanei Yom Tov there ch. 4 Siman 18 os tzadi noted: 'From the time he sets out on the road. So is the version of the Rif, and in the Gemara: from the time he walks on the road.' But see in the Munich manuscript, manuscript 95, brought in Dikdukei Sofrim, the version: he set out on the road; and see Shevus Yaakov vol. 2 Siman 46 ↩
3 OC Siman 110 se'if 7 ↩
4 there s.k. 4 ↩
5 there s.k. 7 ↩
6 Sha'ar Yosef Horayos 4a. And Birkei Yosef Siman 110 s.k. 10 ↩
7 Maseches Chullin, Ner Mitzvah os 71 ↩
8 Shu"t Siman 45 'And so it is implied explicitly from the words of the Semag .. and also the Rambam z"l .. and not one of the Rishonim or Acharonim z"l failed to write that one may recite it before he set out on the road' ↩
9 (by R' A. HaLevi Horowitz, father of the Shelah) os nun ↩
10 there s.k. 14 ↩
11 Mishnah Berurah there s.k. 29 ↩
12 In Yalkut Yosef Tefillah Siman 110 os 9 he wrote that their custom is that immediately when he has set out on the road and left the city, he may recite the bracha; and see what is written in Nimukei OC s.k. 5 ↩
13 Siman 110 s.k. 5 ↩
14 in the Shulchan Aruch Siman 110 se'if 6 ↩
[9] (Halacha 277)
Question: We learned that the obligation of Tefillas HaDerech is on a journey of a parsah; how much is a parsah?
Answer: The Magen Avraham1 and the Alter Rebbe2 wrote regarding Tefillas HaDerech: 'It is 8,000 amos.' And this measure in the units of our times, according to the view of the Rav Chaim Naeh3, is 3.84 km.
Question: Is the measure of a parsah stated in the Gemara a distance of a parsah (3.84 km), such that in a vehicle it is a travel distance of a few minutes from the city, or is the intent the walking of a parsah, the time to walk 8,000 amos (which is about 72 minutes)?
Answer: In the Pesach HaDvir4, brought in the Sdei Chemed5 and the Ketzos HaShulchan6, he wrote: 'I was asked about one who traveled from our city Izmir to the city Orla, which is near us, by land, where the measure of the road, when one travels riding on a donkey, is more than a parsah and it is a place of danger; but now that a "vapor" [steam train] has been newly introduced, also by land, which travels by the power of fire along iron tracks and travels swiftly in a short time, and this one traveled there via this "vapor," must he recite Birchas HaGomel? For it appears that he is exempt for two reasons: either because it is much less than a parsah, or because the road is safe from the danger of bandits, as is famously demonstrated in decisive proof; or perhaps, since for an average person's walking it is more than a parsah, we do not take into account the travel by "vapor" and he is obligated to recite a bracha … It appears obvious that one should not deviate from the boundary that Chazal established, that whoever walks a parsah or more by average walking and there is danger, even though he travels swiftly, is obligated to recite a bracha.'
And indeed this is proven from the words of the Orchos Chaim7 who wrote: 'And the R"M z"l wrote that if one wishes to travel four mil by ship he should recite this tefillah; less than this he should not recite it.' It is proven that we measure by the distance of a parsah, which is four mil, and not by the time of walking a parsah.
And so wrote the Mishnah Berurah8: 'And according to this, also one who travels on the railroad should recite Tefillas HaDerech even if he travels only a parsah'9.
And in the Shevet HaLevi10 he wrote: 'It is obvious that we do not reckon by time, but only the proximity of the city, a parsah in its plain sense; for behold, in our times, when one travels even with airplanes, whereby one can travel to a distant land within an hour and a bit more—and would this be a reason to exempt from Tefillas HaDerech? It is obvious that through the length of the place until he reaches the destination, the time of danger is also lengthened, and a tefillah is required .. And therefore it is obvious that even within the time of walking a parsah, if one travels by car or airplane or the like, he must recite it according to the halacha.'
On the other hand, in the Shu"t Zichron Yehuda11 he was in doubt about this: 'whether this measure depends on the person tarrying the measure of time of four mil, and consequently there is no difference whether he walks on his feet .. or by railroad, or whether the measure of a parsah is stated only regarding the measure of the road .. even if he travels this measure of road .. by railroad,' and he concludes to be stringent, and wrote: 'that one who travels by railroad or the like a measure less than [the time of walking] a parsah should not recite Tefillas HaDerech with Name and Kingship, but rather without Name and Kingship, as is the law in the Shulchan Aruch regarding one who walks less than a parsah, that he recites it without Name and Kingship, so it appears in my humble opinion.'
And so wrote the Shu"t Yabia Omer12: 'Even though according to the words of the Pesach HaDvir and the Sdei Chemed one should recite a bracha on a journey of a parsah, that is, about four km, and so wrote the Maharach Frangi in the Shu"t Yismach Lev vol. 2 (OC Siman 4), and in the sefer Divrei Chizkiyahu vol. 1 (end of Siman 7), as above—in my humble opinion one should not recite a bracha unless he tarried in his journey the measure of walking a parsah, that is, an hour and a fifth. And as written in the Shu"t Zichron Yehuda (Siman 42) above regarding Tefillas HaDerech13.
In practice, most of the poskim held14 that it is a measure of a distance of 3.84 km, and not a travel time of 72 minutes.
Question: One who travels a journey that is a short distance from the city but on a winding road, such that in practice he covered 3.84 km, but as the crow flies from the city there is not 3.84—is he obligated in Tefillas HaDerech?
Answer: The Eshel Avraham wrote15: 'And one need not be concerned on account of [the fact] that from the side he could have gone by a nearer road of less than a parsah, since he [in fact] walked a parsah.' It appears from his words that the main point is whether the person actually walks a parsah.
But on the other hand, in the sefer Shvilei David16 he wrote: 'If there is a city situated on a mountain, and on flat land there is not a walking [distance] of a parsah, it implies that he recites a bracha … but if it is flat, only the road is crooked because of a fence, and on a straight [path] there is not a parsah, in a manner such as written in the Darkei Moshe Siman 688, it implies that he does not recite a bracha.'
And in the Shu"t B'Tzel HaChochma17 he explained his words: 'It appears that his intent is that a city situated on a mountain, since there is no other possibility of reaching it except by walking along the slope of the mountain, and in such walking there is from his place to the city on the mountain a distance of a parsah, and likewise when descending from the city on the mountain there is until the place he wishes to reach a distance of a parsah—he is obligated to recite Tefillas HaDerech .. even though as the crow flies there is not a distance of a parsah here, nonetheless in truth there is here a road of a parsah from the city, and he properly recites a bracha. This is not so on a road that is on flat terrain and there is not a parsah from the city until the place he wishes to go, or vice versa, only that because there is crookedness in the road he has to walk a road of nearly a parsah until his destination—but behold, all that parsah he walks within nearly a parsah of the city, which is a place that has no danger, as the Rosh wrote; therefore he should not recite Tefillas HaDerech.'
Thus, according to his words, on a road that is a parsah or more long because of the turns in the road, and if the road had been straight it would be within the parsah of the city, one should not recite [the bracha] with the Name.
Notes:
1 Siman 110 s.k. 15 ↩
2 there se'if 8 ↩
3 See the measure of a mikveh at the beginning ↩
4 vol. 3 p. 313 ↩
5 vol. 4 (p. 1550) Ma'areches Brochos Siman 2 os 15 ↩
6 Siman 67 os 3 ↩
7 Hilchos Brochos os 62 ↩
8 Siman 110 s.k. 30 ↩
9 See also Tehillah L'David Siman 110 hashmatos 12b ↩
10 vol. 10 Siman 21 os 2 ↩
11 (Greenwald) Siman 42 ↩
12 vol. 1 OC Siman 13 ↩
13 And so wrote the Or L'Tzion vol. 2 ch. 7 os 27 ↩
14 See what is cited in Shulchan Aruch HaKatzar vol. 2 ch. 88 note 4, and in Piskei Teshuvos Siman 110 os 8 note 64. However, the custom of the Sephardim today is to recite it only on a journey of 72 minutes from the city, as explained in the Yabia Omer, and the Or L'Tzion above, and in Yalkut Yosef Tefillah 2 s.k. 10 se'if 2 ↩
15 (Botchatch) Siman 110 se'if 7 ↩
16 Shulchan Aruch OC Siman 110 os 3 ↩
17 vol. 5 Siman 68 ↩
[10] (Halacha 278)
Question: One who sets out on the road, and along the sides of the roads there are settlements—must he recite Tefillas HaDerech with Hashem's Name?
Answer: Now in the Tehillah L'David1 he wrote: 'According to what the Rosh z"l wrote, that less than a parsah close to the city is not a place of danger, then when the road goes close to towns within a parsah, even though he does not travel through the towns, he need not recite a bracha .. And in any case, according to this, if he travels from city to city and there are not two parsaos between them, he need not recite a bracha.'
And likewise the Mishnah Berurah2 was in doubt about this, and this is his language: 'See in the M"B the reason, which is from the Rosh, and seemingly according to this, even if he has to travel a parsah all together, but he travels the parsah through some city, or he knows that some city is close to the side of his route of travel within a parsah, likewise he should not recite Tefillas HaDerech with a closing, for there is no place of danger. And it is possible that they exempted only if his entire route of travel was less than a parsah; and what he [the Shulchan Aruch] said afterward, "provided he has not reached etc."—there it is different, for what he has already walked cannot be combined to obligate him thereby, and what he will travel tomorrow is a separate journey, which is not so in our case; and this requires study.'
And likewise in the Shu"t Minchas Shlomo3 he wrote: 'From Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in my humble opinion it is entirely exempt, for there must be a place of two parsaos without settlement, and thank G-d it is settled. However, in places where there is an Arab settlement, since they are currently enemies, one should consider it like an unsettled place'4.
And according to the words of these poskim, one who travels from city to city does not recite Tefillas HaDerech with a bracha unless there are two parsaos without houses between the cities, for only in such a situation is there for him a distance of a parsah from a city that obligates Tefillas HaDerech5.
On the other hand, many poskim6 wrote that even one who travels on the road within a parsah close to a city that is on the side of the road recites Tefillas HaDerech7.
And as the Shevet HaLevi wrote8: 'Now a certain Torah scholar presented his view that in our times one should not recite Tefillas HaDerech with a bracha with mention of Hashem's Name, since on many roads there are settlements close to the roads within a parsah of the road, and it has been ruled that when one reaches within a parsah of a city he can no longer recite a bracha, and the settlements today are adjacent, such that when one leaves one city—I mean from the parsah of the city—he is again within a parsah near another city in the Holy Land. But my heart does not think so, for [being] within a parsah is mentioned only when he leaves his city and is still within a parsah of his city, upon which the obligation of this bracha has not yet taken effect, for within [the area] close to the city wild beasts and bandits are not common; and likewise at the end of his walking, when he already concludes and reaches his destination, it is no longer applicable to recite a bracha; but when he goes along the highway and close to the road or the route there are settlements within four mil, the measure of a parsah, and he passes them in a flash, and he is in those road dangers that apply in our times, like the accidents so common, alas—in such a case the length of this road is what causes [the obligation of] Tefillas HaDerech. And I have seen in the M"B, in the Biur Halacha Siman 110, that he was in doubt about such a case and left it requiring study; and in my humility, the plain [meaning] of the poskim is as explicit that one is obligated in Tefillas HaDerech, and it is also a reasonable rationale.' And so wrote in practice in the Shu"t Migdal Tzofim9.
Thus, one who sets out on the road outside the city and has passed the 35 meters from the end of the city, even though afterward at the sides of the road he passes within a distance of a parsah of other cities, recites Tefillas HaDerech10.
Notes:
1 Siman 110 os 3 ↩
2 Biur Halacha there in se'if 7. However, some wondered about this doubt, and see at length in the Kuntres Tefillas HaDerech (Schlesinger) Siman 4 ↩
3 Tinyana Siman 60 d"h a) mi'Tel Aviv ↩
4 And see Shu"t B'Tzel HaChochma vol. 5 Siman 68 os 7, and in his sefer Ohalech B'Amitecha ch. 9 halacha 51 ↩
5 And according to their words, what the Shulchan Aruch wrote, a measure of a parsah, does not refer to a case where he travels from city to city, in which case the measure is two parsaos. But seemingly this is not the plain meaning of the language, and the Shulchan Aruch should have explained and not left it unspecified; and on the contrary, see in the Ateres Zekeinim Siman 110 s.k. 7. And furthermore, in Siman 219 se'if 6 concerning Birchas HaGomel: 'In Ashkenaz and France they do not recite a bracha when traveling from city to city .. and in Spain they are accustomed to recite a bracha .. however, for less than a parsah he does not recite a bracha,' and this is learned from Tefillas HaDerech (and moreover see in the Taz there s.k. 4)—it is clear that even from city to city the measure is a parsah ↩
6 And in particular according to the view of the Eshel Avraham (Botchatch) Siman 110 se'if 7: 'One who travels on turns and is within the parsah from his place of lodging, nonetheless he will travel more than a parsah until he arrives there' ↩
7 And seemingly this is implied from the words of the Tur, Shulchan Aruch, and Shulchan Aruch HaRav, who wrote: 'provided he has not reached within a parsah adjacent to the city in which he wishes to lodge'—it implies that only when he is close to the city in which he wishes to lodge does he not recite Tefillas HaDerech (since he is concluding the road, and does not have a measure of a parsah) ↩
8 Shu"t vol. 10 Siman 21 ↩
9 vol. 2 Siman 13 ↩
10 And even though 'less than a parsah close to the city is presumably not a place of danger' (as the Rosh wrote, brought in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe), this may be explained in two ways: a. that although the enactment of the Sages to recite Tefillas HaDerech when one walks a parsah stemmed from the concern of danger, once they defined the obligation of recitation for a road of a parsah, this enactment exists for any walking of a parsah outside the city even where it is not a place of danger. b. that only a parsah close to his own city is considered, relative to the one setting out, not a place of danger; and see in the Tiferes Shmuel on the Rosh ch. 4 os 20 ↩
[11] (Halacha 279)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in memory of Liza bas Chaim z"l Fichman for her yahrzeit
Question: Is one who flies in an airplane obligated in Tefillas HaDerech?
Answer: The gaon Rabbi Sh"Y Zevin wrote1: They asked the Rogatchover gaon whether one must recite Tefillas HaDerech when traveling by airplane; the gaon did not pause even a moment, and answered immediately: it is an explicit Gemara in Chullin2: '"כי יקרא קן צפור לפניך בדרך" ("When you chance upon a bird's nest before you on the road") - one who finds a nest at sea is obligated in shiluach [sending away the mother bird], as it says "הנותן דרך בים" ("Who makes a path in the sea"). If so, one who finds a nest in the sky, as it is written "דרך הנשר בשמים" ("the way of the eagle in the sky"), here too he should be obligated in shiluach? [No—] it is called "the way of the eagle," it is not called simply "a way."' Thus, in the air it is not called by the name "road"! And so wrote the Shu"t Chelkas Yaakov3.
However, the Rebbe4 wondered about his words: 'And in the name of the Rogatchover gaon to the negative, since it is not called "a road" .. and this requires great study - since seemingly in this tefillah the matter of "road" is not the main point, but rather the uprooting from one's place and the walking that is not in the city, in a manner in which there can be an enemy etc., a "place of danger." And furthermore, in the vast majority of cases one must walk on the road until he reaches the airplane (and likewise upon reaching his destination) - only that were it not for the airplane trip, each one would return to his home from the place of the airplane trip, which is a common thing etc.5 .. This is not so when he afterward travels in whatever manner it may be; one should recite a bracha on the road [that leads] up to the airplane. And this is not the place [to elaborate]6.'
And likewise many of the poskim disputed the view of the Rogatchover7.
Thus, in practice, from the standpoint of the essential law one recites Tefillas HaDerech even on a flight in an airplane, only that generally one must recite Tefillas HaDerech already during the drive to the airport.
★★★
Question: In the event that one did not recite Tefillas HaDerech during the drive to the airport—such as when the airport is adjacent to his city—when is the correct time to recite Tefillas HaDerech on the flight?
Answer: We already learned8 that in order to take into account the view of Rashi, it is preferable to recite Tefillas HaDerech l'chatchilah specifically in the first parsah; and therefore in an airplane, since it travels quickly and covers a distance of a parsah rapidly, one should hasten to recite the bracha.
And as written in the Shu"t Mishneh Halachos there: 'Regarding the question about those who set out on the road by airplane, how they should conduct themselves regarding Tefillas HaDerech according to the view of the commentators that one should recite it only within a parsah? Now see in the Shulchan Aruch OC Siman 110 se'if 7, "one recites it after he has set out on the road, and one should recite it only if he has to walk a parsah etc." .. One who travels by airplane must seemingly recite a bracha immediately when the airplane lifts itself into the air, for then he has immediately left the walled city, and if he waits a little he is immediately past a parsah; however, b'dieved if he did not recite a bracha immediately, he may recite a bracha until he has reached within a parsah, understand this well.'
And similarly wrote the Be'er Moshe there: 'a) I answered: certainly and certainly one is obligated to recite Tefillas HaDerech with Name and Kingship on every trip in an airplane, even on the shortest trip, for it is impossible that it be so short that one would not be obligated to recite Tefillas HaDerech; and when one must change from one airplane to another airplane in the middle of the journey on the same day, having already recited it once, he need not recite it again; but when he changes on another day he recites a bracha again with Name and Kingship. .. d) The measure of a parsah in an airplane is completed in an instant, and the bracha of Tefillas HaDerech may properly be recited at the time the airplane begins to run along the ground in order to ascend into the air.
Thus, in practice, one who did not recite Tefillas HaDerech on the way to the airplane should l'chatchilah recite it when the airplane travels along the runway before takeoff, and b'dieved he may recite it up to a parsah before reaching his city.
Notes:
1 in his sefer Ishim V'Shitos p. 97 ↩
2 139b ↩
3 OC Siman 55 (in the earlier printing vol. 2 Siman 9) ↩
4 Likkutei Sichos vol. 12 p. 152 ↩
5 For an explanation of the Rebbe's words, see what is written in Kovetz Ha'aros U'Biurim issue 834 p. 14 ↩
6 By way of wit, one can bring an example from the fact that one is obligated in learning Torah even during his airplane trip, even though the command regarding this is '"ובלכתך בדרך" ("and when you walk on the road")' (Sefer HaMinhogim p. 15) ↩
7 See Shu"t Yabia Omer vol. 2 Siman 14. And Yechaveh Daas vol. 2 Siman 26. Shu"t Mishneh Halachos vol. 11 Siman 77. Ohalech B'Amitecha ch. 9 halacha 5 and note 7. Shu"t Be'er Moshe (Stern) vol. 7 Siman 114 ↩
8 in halacha no. 275 ↩
[12] (Halacha 280)
Question: What is the law when the journey is long and the person makes a stop in the middle of the road—when he continues on his way must he recite Tefillas HaDerech again?
Answer: The Kol Bo wrote1: 'And the R"M z"l wrote: a person who travels outside the city need only recite this tefillah once, at the beginning of the day; and even if he rests in a city in the middle of the road for one hour, when he leaves there he need not recite Tefillas HaDerech another time—end of his language. But if his intent was to lodge in the city and afterward he changed his mind and left it to pass beyond it or to return to his home, he must again recite it another time. So wrote R' Yitzchak, the author of the Manhig.'
And the Bach wrote2: 'And what [the Tur] wrote, that one need only recite it once a day etc. However, each day one must recite it when he sets out on the road, unlike some who err and do not recite it except on the first day at the beginning of their departure from their home; for behold, even when his intent was to lodge in a city and afterward he changed his mind to pass beyond it, he must again recite it another time, as the Kol Bo wrote and the Bais Yosef brings him—all the more so when he lodges in a city, that he must again recite it during the day when he leaves the city in which he lodged; and likewise each and every day he must pray, just as he is obligated in Shemoneh Esrei each and every day; and this is an obvious matter that he need not have written, except to remove [the notion] from the view of the errant ones.'
And so it appears from the words of the Taz and the Pri Megadim3, and the Olas Tamid4 on the words of the Shulchan Aruch5.
Thus, according to this view, one should recite Tefillas HaDerech every morning.
But the Radbaz6 wrote on the words of the Tur: 'And from the fact that he wrote "one need only recite it once a day," it implies that each day, at least, one must recite it, since he did not write "one need not recite it twice a day even if he rests etc." This appears to me as the halacha; but in practice, if he did not lodge in a settled place, or if they were traveling by day and by night, the first time he recites a bracha and closes, and on the other days he recites a bracha but does not close7.' And the Chida wrote8: 'And according to this, those who go down to the sea should not recite a bracha with a closing except on the first day, and on the other days out of doubt they should recite it without a closing, as above.'
Thus, according to his view it will depend on whether there was a diversion of attention or not: for if he slept in a city there is a diversion of attention and he recites a bracha again; but in the event that he did not lodge in a settled place there is no diversion of attention and he recites it without closing with the Name9.
But the Pri Chadash10 disagreed and wrote: 'But my opinion is not so; rather, one recites this tefillah only at the beginning of his departure, and even though he is delayed on the road many days, since he recited a bracha once, he is thereby exempted.'
Thus, according to his view one recites Tefillas HaDerech only on the first day of the journey, and on the other days without Hashem's Name.
In practice: The Alter Rebbe in the Shulchan Aruch11 ruled in accordance with the words of the Taz, and this is his language: 'One need only recite Tefillas HaDerech once on each day that he travels, and even if he rests in a city in the middle of the day and resumes traveling from there onward or to return to his home; but if his intent was to lodge in a city and afterward he changed his mind and left it to pass beyond it or to return to his home, he must again recite it another time as if he had already lodged there (for so it is with all the brochos, that when one changes his mind he must again recite a bracha, as written in Siman 206).' And he further wrote12: '(And according to all opinions, when he is on the road he may recite it within the city in which he lodges, since he has already set out and is traveling on the road and is still upon it, for in this city he is only a guest who turned in to lodge).'
But in the Siddur he wrote: 'Tefillas HaDerech .. and on the other days when he is delayed on the road until his return home, he recites it every morning even at the inn, and closes with "Boruch Atah shome'a tefillah" without mention of Hashem's Name.'
And so wrote the Tzemach Tzedek13: 'And according to us, who pray on all the days he is delayed on the road except for day one without Name and Kingship—the bracha too must be without Name and Kingship.'
And the Rav Chaim Naeh wrote14 that in the Siddur he took into account the view of the Pri Chadash, and therefore ruled to recite Tefillas HaDerech with Hashem's Name only on the first day of his departure.
And in the Sha'ar HaKollel15 he wrote on the Siddur: '"until his return home etc." without mention of the Name. That is, even if he was delayed several days at an inn or in another city, nonetheless until his return home he recites Tefillas HaDerech every day, only that he should not mention the Name in the closing. And likewise the whole time of his travel, whether on his way there or his return, nonetheless he should not mention the Name in the closing except on the first day; and after the first day from his departure from his home he should not mention the Name in the closing'16.
And regarding the Rebbe Rashab17, the Rebbe writes: 'From the practices of my father: when he traveled from his home, even though he remained in one place several months, he would recite every day after davening Tefillas HaDerech - without Name and Kingship'18.
Notes:
1 Siman 87 ↩
2 OC Siman 110 ↩
3 s.k. 5 ↩
4 s.k. 10 ↩
5 se'if 5. And see also in the Knesses HaGedolah, Hagahos Bais Yosef there os 7 ↩
6 Shu"t vol. 6 Siman 2176 ↩
7 Some noted that perhaps the Radbaz's intent is regarding the tefillah of Havineinu, which in the Kol Bo there is also called Tefillas HaDerech; but seemingly from the fact that the Radbaz quotes the Tur and discusses his words, it appears that he refers to Tefillas HaDerech ↩
8 Birkei Yosef in Siman 110 s.k. 9 ↩
9 And see Mishnah Berurah s.k. 26 ↩
10 there se'if 5 ↩
11 Siman 110 se'if 5 ↩
12 se'if 6 ↩
13 Chiddushim on Piskei HaRosh Brochos (196c os 18) ↩
14 there s.k. 6. And see Tehillah L'David Siman 110 os 1. Mishmeres Shalom Siman 16 and in the second edition. And Agura B'Ohalecha vol. 2 Siman 7 p. 75 ↩
15 ch. 12 os 2 ↩
16 And see what is written in the Ketzos HaShulchan Siman 67 s.k. 7 ↩
17 HaYom Yom, 19 Tammuz, Sefer HaMinhogim p. 23 ↩
18 In the sicha of 12 Tammuz 5721 (Toras Menachem vol. 31 p. 106) the Rebbe mentioned: 'Known is the practice of the father of the Rebbe Rayatz, the Rebbe Rashab, may his memory protect us, that as long as he had not returned home .. he was accustomed to recite Tefillas HaDerech; in the revealed [law] the ruling is that one recites this only on the first day, and on the days afterward (certainly if he is in a settled place) it is in doubt, so he adjoined it to a tefillah that contains the matter of a bracha with Name and Kingship' (and it requires examination whether the Rebbe's intent was that he literally adjoined it to a bracha according to the rules of an adjoining bracha, or only in the general matter. And this is not the place [to elaborate]) ↩
[13] (Halacha 281)
Question: Must one adjoin Tefillas HaDerech to another bracha?
Answer: Rabbeinu Yona wrote1: 'Regarding Tefillas HaDerech, which does not open with Boruch and closes with "shome'a tefillah," it is because since in Shemoneh Esrei the bracha of "shome'a tefillah" is adjoined to its fellow, if now it is not adjoined to its fellow we are not concerned about this.'
Another reason is given by Tosafos2: 'All the brochos open with Boruch and close with Boruch .. and Tefillas HaDerech, which closes and does not open with Boruch—one can say it is because they are not [proper] brochos, but rather praise and tefillah in general.'
The Tur3 brought the words of Tosafos: 'And that it does not open with Boruch, the Ri explained it is because it is only a tefillah in general, in which one prays to Hakadosh Baruch Hu that He lead him in peace, and it is not like the brochos of enjoyment nor like the brochos instituted on account of an occurrence, but rather a request for mercy; and because there is length of words in it they close it with Boruch. And the R"M of Rothenburg, when he would set out on the road in the morning, would recite it after "Yehi ratzon" in order to adjoin it to the bracha "gomel chasadim," so that it would be a bracha adjoined to its fellow.'
Additional possibilities of adjoining are brought in the poskim; the Agudah4 wrote: 'And it is good to recite it immediately after Shemoneh Esrei so that it be a bracha adjoined to its fellow; and if it is midday it is good that he drink wine or beer or eat fruit and recite a bracha before and after and adjoin to it this tefillah.'
And the Shelah5 wrote: 'And if he travels during the day, then he should bring himself to the obligation of a bracha, such as urinating or the like, and adjoin it; and afterward all the days he is on the road, each and every morning, he should adjoin it to "Yehi ratzon" like the Maharam, understand this.'
And on this basis the Mechaber wrote6: 'The R"M of Rothenburg, when he would set out on the road in the morning, would recite it after "Yehi ratzon" in order to adjoin it to the bracha "gomel chasadim," so that it would be a bracha adjoined to its fellow.'
And the Magen Avraham7 added the other possibilities: 'And if he travels in the middle of the day he should adjoin it to another bracha, such as by eating or drinking something and reciting a bracha acharona, or urinating and reciting "asher yatzar."'
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe8: 'Tefillas HaDerech closes with Boruch and does not open with Boruch, since it is only a request for mercy; and nonetheless it is good to adjoin it to some bracha so that it be a bracha adjoined to its fellow, which need not open with Boruch9, such as if he travels in the morning he should adjoin it to the bracha "gomel chasadim tovim l'amo Yisrael" if he recites the morning brochos after he has set out on the road, as explained; and if he travels in the middle of the day he should eat or drink the [requisite] measure so that he recites a bracha acharona, or urinate and recite "asher yatzar," and afterward begin immediately "Yehi ratzon milfanecha etc."'
But in the Siddur the Alter Rebbe did not mention this practice.
And it is worth noting the sicha of the Rebbe Rayatz10: 'When the Alter Rebbe traveled then from Minsk .. among those accompanying him was also the chassid and gaon R' Yitzchak Aizik of Homel, and a discussion in halacha developed about Tefillas HaDerech—whether it is a bracha in its own right or whether it must be a bracha adjoined to its fellow. And they concluded that it is a bracha in its own right, that is, that it constitutes a bracha of its own. The Alter Rebbe then said that Tefillas HaDerech is a tefillah for the entire span of a person's life on the face of the earth, for each and every day is part of the road.'
Regarding the practice of the Rebbe Rashab on his journey to the summer home it is brought11: 'Also on this journey, when we left the city .. he commanded [the driver] to stop and he washed his hands and prayed Tefillas HaDerech while sitting and with his holy eyes closed.' Thus it is not mentioned that he was particular to make a bracha before Tefillas HaDerech12.
Regarding the practice of the Rebbe it is brought in the sefer 'BiNaos Deshe'13: When everyone exited the vehicle, R' Y.Tz. שי' Holtzman approached the Rebbe and suggested that he taste some of what the righteous Rebbetzin, may her memory protect us, had sent - a thermos of tea and various baked goods, and the Rebbe declined. And likewise further on14 it is related: A short time after they set out on the road .. they stopped for Tefillas HaDerech, and the Rebbe exited the car, washed his holy hands, and R' Sh. Levitin approached the Rebbe and suggested that he taste something (a candy). But the Rebbe declined, saying: 'One need not,' and began reciting Tefillas HaDerech.
Thus, in practice, we are not particular to adjoin Tefillas HaDerech to another bracha15.
Notes:
1 Brochos 1a ↩
2 Pesachim 104b ↩
3 OC Siman 110 ↩
4 Brochos ch. 4 Siman 99 ↩
5 Maseches Chullin, chapter Ner Mitzvah ↩
6 Shulchan Aruch OC Siman 110 se'if 6 ↩
7 there s.k. 13 ↩
8 there se'if 7 ↩
9 In Igros Kodesh vol. 3 p. 141: 'And if "Yehi ratzon" of Tefillas HaDerech is a bracha, nonetheless they said that it is good to adjoin it to some bracha so that at its beginning too it opens with a bracha (Shulchan Aruch of our Rebbe OC 110 se'if 7. And see also se'if 6-7)' ↩
10 Sefer HaSichos 5701 p. 148, in the Hebrew edition p. 127 ↩
11 Kuntres U'Ma'ayan p. 34 ↩
12 And it is worth noting (and see Siddur of the Alter Rebbe - Raskin p. 692) from what is brought in Likkutei Dibburim (vol. 4 p. 1375 and in the Hebrew edition vol. 3-4 p. 928) 'My father descends from the carriage, goes off to the side among the trees of the forest, and comes back and washes his hands, recites a bracha, and proceeds to recite Birchas HaDerech word by word, so that I too could recite it after him by heart.' However, since we saw that on other occasions he was not particular about this, it stands to reason to say that this was not on account of a halachic need to adjoin; and especially according to what is explained in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe (Siman 92 se'if 1 and see also Siman 6 se'if 1) that a person who needs to relieve himself should not pray in that state. And it is also worth noting the words of the Rebbe on 12 Tammuz 5721 regarding the practice of the Rebbe Rashab at the inn, which implies that only when there is a doubt whether to recite it 'he was accustomed to adjoin it to a tefillah that contains a bracha with Name and Kingship.' (And see in halacha no. 280) ↩
13 p. 47 note 1 ↩
14 p. 84 ↩
15 And it is also worth noting from Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 5 Siman 46: 'And on the contrary, there is room to say that one should not be particular about it being adjoined to its fellow, for then it appears that he intends [it as] a bracha, and some are concerned that in our times there is no need, and it is a concern of a bracha in vain; but with the accepted formula, when it is not adjoined, one can say it is like a tefillah and there is no concern, as the Pri Chadash YD wrote in the laws of doubts that one is permitted to recite a supplication and close with "Baruch Atah Hashem shome'a tefillah," and only if he intends [it as] a bracha is it forbidden' ↩
From the project 'Shoneh Halacha' - daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the group (silent): 'Shoneh Halacha - Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group