Reciting Hallel
[4] (halacha 699)
Question: Must one stand while reciting Hallel?
Answer: It is written in Shibolei HaLeket1 and likewise written in Tanya Rabbati2: 'And my teacher Rabbeinu Meir, may his light shine, ruled that the mitzvah of Hallel is to recite it standing, and the reason was written by my brother R' Binyamin, may his light shine, based on the verse "הללו עבדי ה' שעומדים בבית ה'" ("Praise, O servants of Hashem, who stand in the House of Hashem") — that is to say, praise Hashem while standing, for the Hallel is testimony to the praise of the Omnipresent and His wonders and the miracles He performed for us, and the mitzvah of testimony is performed standing [as it says "ועמדו שני האנשים" ("and the two men shall stand"), and Scripture is speaking of witnesses3], and likewise they would recite it in the Azarah over the slaughtering of the Pesach offerings while standing, for there is no sitting in the Azarah4, and as for the fact that we recite it on the nights of Pesach while sitting — since we divide it, for we do not recite all of it at once, we do not trouble him to stand. And furthermore, since he is sitting at his table with his cup in his hand, perhaps his mind will be distracted from his seudah and he will drop the cup from his hand. And in Maseches Sofrim it is implied that they were accustomed to recite it standing in the synagogue on the night of Pesach; therefore they did not now trouble him to rise from his table to recite it standing, and you will find it before us in the order of the Haggadah. And my teacher Rabbeinu Meir, may his light shine, ruled that since the manner of the nights of Pesach is one of reclining and freedom, we do not trouble him to stand'.
The Beis Yosef5 cited this briefly6: 'It is written in Shibolei HaLeket that the Rav Rabbeinu Meir ruled that the mitzvah of Hallel is to recite it standing, and the reason was written by HaR' Binyamin based on the verse "הללו עבדי ה' שעומדים בבית ה'" ("Praise, O servants of Hashem, who stand in the House of Hashem")7, and as for the fact that we recite it on the night of Pesach while sitting — since we divide it, we do not trouble him to stand. And furthermore, since he is standing at his table with his cup in his hand, perhaps his mind will be distracted from his seudah and the cup will fall from his hand. And HaR"M wrote that since the manner of the night of Pesach is [one of] reclining and freedom, we do not trouble him to stand,' end of quote'.
And as halacha the Mechaber wrote8: 'The mitzvah of reciting Hallel is standing'.
And the Magen Avraham wrote9: 'It is forbidden to lean oneself against a pillar or against the wall, for leaning is not like standing, as the Tur wrote in Siman 141 and in Tosafos Sotah folio 40; and how greatly I wondered at the Rema in Choshen Mishpat Siman 17, who wrote in the name of the Rivash regarding testimony that standing by means of leaning is properly called standing for this matter ..'.
[And likewise the Taz wrote10, who upon the words of the Mechaber regarding the Torah reading11: 'one must read standing, and even to lean oneself against the wall or against a pillar is forbidden unless he is a corpulent person'. The Taz wrote: 'In Choshen Mishpat Siman 17 in the Rema [it states] that standing by means of leaning is called standing with respect to witnesses, whose law is to stand; but he was not precise, as I refuted his view there in our words, see there'].
And the Machatzis HaShekel wrote upon the Magen Avraham there: and if he is a corpulent person he is permitted to lean somewhat, but if he leans so much that were the thing he is leaning upon to be removed he would fall, then even for a corpulent person it is forbidden, as is implied above in Siman 141 regarding the reading of the Torah scroll, and the same applies here'.
And from his words it is understood that an ordinary person is not permitted to lean even somewhat12, as the Magen Avraham wrote there13 regarding the reading of the Torah, that even slight leaning is forbidden. And it is explained in the words of the Magen Avraham that when the standing must be in a manner of awe and reverence, one may not lean even somewhat. As the Machatzis HaShekel wrote there14: 'since the reason is that it must be with awe, even leaning somewhat is not a manner of awe .. for specifically that which was forbidden because it is not a manner of awe — namely, leaning somewhat — this was permitted for a corpulent person, since because he is a corpulent person it is evident that he is not leaning in a manner of haughtiness, and it is fine. This is not so regarding complete leaning, which is forbidden because it is not standing .. in any case, since standing is required, even for a corpulent person it was not permitted'.
And ostensibly it may be said that this is also the view of the Alter Rebbe, for regarding the Shemoneh Esrei tefillah, which one must stand for with awe and reverence [as explained in the Beis Yosef Siman 141], the Alter Rebbe wrote15: 'one should be careful not to lean oneself against the wall or against a pillar or against one's fellow during tefillah, as will be explained in Siman 141'. And from his wording it appears that one may not lean at all, and this is unlike [the cases of] the blowing of the shofar16 and the confession of Yom Kippur17, where the Alter Rebbe wrote that the prohibition to lean is only in a manner whereby, were the thing he is leaning upon to be removed, he would fall; and regarding tefillah, since the Alter Rebbe did not write this condition, it is understood that something which is [required] on account of standing with awe and reverence — one may not lean at all.
And it is also worth noting from what the Alter Rebbe wrote regarding the recitation of Hallel on the night of the Seder18 from the Shelah19 and the Chok Yaakov20: 'even though the recitation of Hallel is standing, as is explained in Siman 420, nevertheless the Hallel of this night is recited even while sitting, because all the acts of this night are in a manner of freedom; therefore we do not trouble him to stand, but nevertheless he should not recite the Hallel and the Haggadah while leaning on his side, but rather he should sit with awe and with reverence, see Siman 63'.
However, after the fact, or when one is utterly unable to stand, the Magen Avraham wrote21 regarding the reading of the Torah that after the fact he has fulfilled his obligation, and based on this it may be said that with Hallel too he fulfills his obligation. And so ruled the Pri Megadim22.
And it is worth noting from what the Mekor Chaim wrote23: 'and for a corpulent person and [for one with] any [valid] reason whatsoever we permit reciting it while sitting, for what they wrote, that they stand in the House of Hashem, is a weak support'. And in the Aruch HaShulchan24 he wrote: 'and it is obvious that one who is not in proper health may sit, for even though regarding Shemoneh Esrei he exerts himself and stands, nevertheless regarding Hallel we are not concerned about this, for on the nights of Pesach they recite it while sitting'.
Therefore, ideally one must recite the Hallel standing, and not lean at all, unless it is a corpulent person or one who is ill [in which case he is permitted to lean somewhat, in a manner whereby if the thing he is leaning upon were taken from him he would not fall], and if there is no possibility at all and he must sit, even so he should sit with awe and with reverence. A person who transgressed and recited it while sitting has fulfilled his obligation.
-----
Notes:
1 ענין ר"ח סי' קעג ↩
2 דיני הלל סי' לב ↩
3 שבועות ל, א ↩
4 יומא כה, א ↩
5 או"ח סי' תכב ↩
6 לכאורה הנוסח שלפניו הי' שונה משלנו. ואכמ"ל ↩
7 וכתב הפר"ח (או"ח סי' תכב ס"ז): 'וטעם זה אינו מבואר אצלי, דקרא משמע דהכי קאמר הללו עבדי ה' שכבר הם עומדים בבית ה', ולא משמע דבעי למימר שיעמדו בשביל ההלל. אבל מצאתי כתוב בשם ס' תניא שהטעם לפי שההלל עדות שבחו של מקום ונפלאותיו וניסיו שעשה לנו ומצות עדות בעמידה וכן ראוי לנהוג ..'. אמנם החיד"א (בברכ"י או"ח סי' תכב ס"ק ו) כתב ליישב: 'ויש לישב דאלמלא מצות הלל מעומד למה לו להזכיר שעומדים. אלא פירושא דקרא דמאחר שהם עומדים, להם יאתה לקרא הלל, דמצותו בעמידה' ↩
8 שו"ע או"ח סי' תכב ס"ז ↩
9 ס"ק יא ↩
10 או"ח סי' קמא ס"ק א ↩
11 שם ס"א ↩
12 ודלא כמשנ"ב (בביאור הלכה סי' תכב ס"ז) שהתיר לכתחילה סמיכה מועטת ↩
13 סי' קמא ס"ק ב ↩
14 סי' קמא ס"ק ב ↩
15 או"ח סי' צד ס"ח ↩
16 או"ח סי' תקפה ס"א ↩
17 או"ח סי' תרז ס"ז ↩
18 שו"ע או"ח סי' תעג סמ"ח ↩
19 מסכת פסחים פרק נר מצוה [אות מו] ↩
20 או"ח סי' תעג ס"ק לה ↩
21 כך נראה מדבריו בסי' קמא סק"א ↩
22 משב"ז ס"ק ד ↩
23 סי' תכב ↩
24 או"ח סי' תכב סי"ג ↩
[5] (halacha 700)
The study of this halacha is dedicated to the memory of Mrs. Chagit Hodaya, peace be upon her, daughter of (may he be set apart for long life) Reuven HaLevi.
Question: Why do we not recite Shehecheyanu over the recitation of Hallel?
Answer: We find in the words of the Rishonim several approaches to explain why they did not institute the bracha of Shehecheyanu, as follows:
a) Rabbeinu Yehuda b"R Kalonymos wrote1: 'and even though we recite a bracha over the recitation of Hallel, "to read" or "to complete" Hallel, we do not recite Shehecheyanu over its recitation, for one recites Shehecheyanu only over the essence of the mitzvah which comes on account of a [fixed] time. Such as the Yamim Tovim on which they would offer the additional sacrifices, as is stated in Erchin, chapter Ein BeErchin. And over the sacrifices they established to recite song; therefore, every day which differs in its sacrifices we complete the Hallel, as is stated in Erchin. And the Hallel is for song and thanksgiving over the miracle and the joy ..'.
b) In Tosafos HaRosh2 he wrote: 'and as for the fact that we recite Shehecheyanu over the reading of the Megillah but over the recitation of Hallel we do not recite it, it may be said that publicizing the miracle is different'.
c) The Ran3 wrote: 'and they wrote in Tosafos that there are mitzvos over which they instituted Shehecheyanu .. and there are mitzvos over which they did not institute Shehecheyanu .. and it appears to me that Shehecheyanu depends on a mitzvah [bound to a fixed] time, as is proven at the end of chapter BeChol Mearvin4, for we say regarding Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur that since it comes from time to time one recites over them "Zman"; therefore Sukkah and lulav and the reading of the Megillah come from time to time, and pidyon haben, even though it does not come from time to time, nevertheless since it is a mitzvah dependent on a time — the 30 days of the infant who has emerged from the category of a stillbirth and entered the category of viability and life — it is proper to recite Shehecheyanu over it; but tefillin and circumcision do not depend on a time, and the Hallel of the two Yamim Tovim too, even though they depend on a time, since they instituted to recite [Hallel] over every trouble that should not come upon the community, its time is not fixed'5.
d) The Abudraham6 wrote: 'and the correct reason in my eyes is that which is written in the Teshuvos HaGeonim, that one recites Shehecheyanu only over something in which there is joy and physical benefit .. And should you say: but the recitation of Hallel on the festivals and on Rosh Chodesh, in which there is joy, and we do not recite Shehecheyanu as with the reading of the Megillah! And it may be said that the recitation of Hallel of the festivals is sufficed by the "Zman" that one recites on the festival. And over the Hallel of Rosh Chodesh one should not recite Shehecheyanu, because some of the months are deficient and we do not find Shehecheyanu in less than thirty days7, for one who sees his fellow within less than thirty days does not recite Shehecheyanu. And for this reason too we do not recite "Zman" on Shabbosos over the cup, because they are within less than thirty days'8.
That is to say, according to the view of the Abudraham it is impossible to recite Shehecheyanu over Hallel, since in a deficient month it turns out that the interval between one Rosh Chodesh and the next is less than thirty days, and one cannot recite [Shehecheyanu] over the same thing within less than thirty days.
But the Magen Avraham9 raised a difficulty against the reason of the Abudraham, that ostensibly there is no difference between a deficient month and a full one, for even in a full month there are not thirty days, since we recite Hallel also on the first day of Rosh Chodesh: 'and this requires examination, for even when the month is full there are two days of Rosh Chodesh and we recite it on the thirtieth day, and it is possible that he holds that since the second day is the essential one, the first day is for him like one who reads in the Torah, who is not obligated in the matter'.
And the Pri Chadash wrote10: 'HaR"D Abudraham wrote at the beginning of his book in the third gate that this is the reason that we do not recite "Zman" over Hallel, because we do not recite "Zman" in less than thirty days, and sometimes some of the months are deficient, end of quote. But to me there is no need for this, for since it is a minhag we do not recite "Zman". However, we need his reason for the days on which an individual completes Hallel [enumerated in Erchin 10a], that we do not recite Shehecheyanu because within less than thirty days he has already recited the Hallel.
[The Acharonim further discussed the words of the Abudraham, for from his words it is understood that the entire deficiency is that Rosh Chodesh can occur at an interval of less than 30 days from one another, yet Tosafos wrote that over something common one does not recite Shehecheyanu unless half a year passes from one time to the next, and these are the words of the Magen Avraham there: 'and in any case, at the very root of the matter there is a refutation, for they did not institute "Zman" over something that is common, for specifically over something that comes every half year they wrote in Berachos folio 3711 that one recites "Zman," and see what I wrote in Siman 225'.
The Eliyah Rabbah12 wrote to resolve the difficulty of the Magen Avraham: 'and there is no difficulty at all, for in HaR"D Abudraham himself, folio 8, he wrote that one who sees his fellow within less than 30 days does not recite Shehecheyanu, end of quote, and this too is from the Shas, and if so they contradict one another. And it appears to me that the matter of half a year is not precise, but rather it speaks of where there is no fixed time and sometimes they are within 30 days'. And see what the Pri Megadim and the Machatzis HaShekel wrote upon the Magen Avraham there].
Notes:
1 ערכי תנאים ואמוראים רב ייבא סבא ↩
2 סוכה מו, א ↩
3 סוכה כב, ב מדפי הרי"ף ↩
4 מ, ב ↩
5 הרש"ש בהגהות על השו"ע תמה מדוע לא הביאו את טעם הר"ן, נו"כ השו"ע ↩
6 ברכת המצות ומשפטיהם ↩
7 וראה דברי חמודות ברכות פ"ט אות ח. מג"א סי' ריח ס"ק ד ובפמ"ג ומחצית השקל. ולהעיר מסדר ברה"נ של אדמו"ר הזקן פי"ג סי"ג. ואכמ"ל ↩
8 כתב הכנה"ג הגה"ט או"ח סי' תכב אות ה: 'ונ"ל שזה הטעם עצמו יספיק למה שאין אנו מברכין זמן בברכת הלבנה'. וראה ג"כ משנה הלכות חי"א סי' שלז שכ"כ מדעת עצמו ↩
9 או"ח סי' תכב ס"ב ↩
10 ב, תוס' ד"ה היה ↩
11 סי' תכב ס"ק י ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project - daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha - Chabad Customs'
Join the WhatsApp group