Completing the 248 Words of Krias Shema
[1] (Halacha 1114)
The 248 Words
Question: Why do we add several words in Krias Shema, and what is the addition?
Answer: It is written in Midrash Tanchuma1: 'Rabbi Mani said: Let Krias Shema not be light in your eyes, for it contains 248 words, corresponding to the number of limbs in a person, and among them is "Baruch Shem". HaKadosh Baruch Hu said: If you guarded what is Mine, to read Krias Shema properly, I will guard what is yours. Therefore David praises: "שמרני כאישון בת עין" ("Guard me like the apple of the eye"). HaKadosh Baruch Hu said to him: "שמור מצותי וחיה" ("Keep My commandments and live")'.
Thus we see in the Midrash that Krias Shema contains 248 words, but this requires explanation, for in practice there are fewer words; and there are several approaches in the words of the early authorities as to how one arrives at 248 words, as follows:
a) It is written in the Zohar Chadash2: 'And Rabbi Nehorai said: In Krias Shema there are 248 words, corresponding to the number of the 248 limbs of a person, and one who reads Krias Shema properly — each and every limb takes one word for itself and is healed by it; and this is "רפאות תהי לשרך ושיקוי לעצמותיך" ("It shall be health to your navel and marrow to your bones"). Meanwhile, that child arrived, weary from the journey, and sat before them. He heard these words, stood up on his feet and said: "But in Krias Shema there are only 245 words!" Rabbi Chiya said to him: "Sit, my son." [He sat.] He said: "My son, have you heard anything about this matter?" He said to him: "Thus I heard from my father, that in Krias Shema there are 248 words less three, of the number of a person's limbs. What is its remedy? They instituted that the chazzan repeats these three words — and what are they? "ה' אלהיכם אמת" ("Hashem your G-d is true") — in order to complete 248 words for the congregation; and in order that he not interrupt before "Emes", not less than three and not more than three .. And so said Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri in the name of Rabbi Yosi ben Durmaskis in the name of Rabbi Akiva: The early chassidim instituted Krias Shema corresponding to the Ten Commandments and corresponding to the number of a person's limbs; and since three were missing from them, they instituted that the chazzan repeat and complete them — and what are they? "ה' אלהיכם אמת" .. And whoever says Krias Shema not with the congregation does not complete his limbs, because he is missing the three words that the chazzan repeats. What is his remedy? He should have in mind the fifteen vavs of "Emes V'Yatziv". And with all this, my father would apply to him: "מעוות לא יוכל לתקן" ("That which is crooked cannot be made straight") etc. — those three words of Krias Shema that the chazzan repeats, he cannot count them toward completing the 248 as with the chazzan'.
And in the Tikkunei Zohar3: 'And it is comprised of the four parshiyos of Krias Shema, which are 248 words with "Kel Melech Ne'eman"; and so that they not make an interruption, they instituted that the chazzan repeat "ה' אלוקיכם אמת"'.
> Thus, according to the opinion of the Zohar, the chazzan repeats at the end of Krias Shema the words "ה' אלוקיכם אמת", and thereby completes what is missing.
And in accordance with the words of the Zohar, several Rishonim wrote that this was the practice in many communities; and this is the wording of Shu"t Min HaShamayim4: 'Do I not know that Krias Shema corresponds to the number of a person's limbs, and if three are missing, the chazzan repeats them? And the reason is because these three are completed by another and not by the one reading, and the chazzan repeats and completes them; and they correspond to the three Patriarchs of the world — the two arms and the body in the middle — and the Patriarchs are the Merkavah, and they are completed and included through another, like the other limbs. And these are "ה' אלהים אמת": one is right, and one is left, "Emes" in the middle, and that is the body. And immediately they wait to be completed according to their greatness and stature; and one who reads them in an undertone will not lack anything, but one who reads them aloud will skip over his fellow's voice, and their limbs will be lacking, and the person is not completed; and therefore it must be in an undertone'.
b) The Rokeach wrote5: 'From "Kel Melech Ne'eman" until "Ani Hashem Elokeichem" there are 248 words, corresponding to the 248 limbs, as is stated in the Tanchuma: Rabbi Mani said, Let Krias Shema not be light in your eyes, for it contains 248 words corresponding to the limbs of a person, and among them is "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso" etc. HaKadosh Baruch Hu said: If [you guard] Mine properly, I will guard yours. Therefore, 248 words — "שמרני כאישון בת עין". HaKadosh Baruch Hu said to him: "שמור מצותי וחיה". Therefore we join "Kel Melech Ne'eman" and "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso" to complete the 248; for in the Torah, from "Shema" until "U'visharecha" there are 48 words, "V'haya Im Shamoa" 122, Tzitzis 69 — thus 239 corresponding to his limbs; and in the head there are 9 limbs, therefore we add 9 words: "Kel Melech Ne'eman" and "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso L'olam Va'ed"'.
And so wrote the Ra'avyah6 in the name of the Yerushalmi: 'There are 248 words in Krias Shema less three, corresponding to the 248 limbs of a person; the Rabbis added three to them — "Kel Melech Ne'eman" — until they became 248. End of the Gemara of Eretz Yisroel'.
And the Kolbo7 wrote: 'And the Rosh z"l wrote: All these lands have the custom of saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" to complete 248 words in Krias Shema .. And there are places where they do not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" because it is an acronym of "Amen" by its initial letters, and we should not interrupt between the bracha and Krias Shema'8.
c) The Orchos Chaim wrote9: 'And he z"l wrote: Since they had the custom of saying it, I needed to ask the Ram HaLevi z"l, and he answered me that it is clear that it is a mistake, and it was not the custom either in Sefarad or in Eretz Yisroel. And the reason that it is not proper to say it is that since the brochos come upon Krias Shema, one should not interrupt between the bracha and the mitzvah. And to complete the 248 words, there is one who says that we repeat twice "להיות לכם לאלהים" ("to be your G-d")'.
d) In Sefer HaPliah10 he wrote that the chazzan repeats "Ani Hashem Elokeichem". And so wrote the Tashbetz11: 'And so it is in the Midrash Yelamdenu, that there are 248 words in the three parshiyos of Krias Shema, yet they are only 245, but they had the custom of saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman", and with them they are 248; and based on their custom they would expound: Guard My 248 and I will guard your 248. And so is the custom in Sefarad, to repeat "Ani Hashem Elokeichem" to complete the 248, so as not to interrupt between the bracha "HaBocher B'amo Yisroel B'ahavah" and "Shema Yisroel"'.
> Thus we have seen the importance of saying 248 words, and the various minhogim for completing the words. And in the next halacha we will see more of the words of the Rishonim.
--------------
Notes:
1 Kedoshim, siman 6 ↩
2 Rus 30b ↩
3 Tikkun 10, 25b ↩
4 Siman 89 ↩
5 Hilchos Brochos, siman 320; and see also Da'as Zekeinim MiBa'alei HaTosafos, Va'eschanan 6:4 ↩
6 Part 1, Brochos, siman 33 ↩
7 Siman 9 ↩
8 Regarding the minhag of adding "Kel Melech Ne'eman", some wrote that one also says "Amen". As the Tur wrote, Orach Chaim siman 61: 'Some have the custom to first say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", and some say that they add "Amen, Kel Melech Ne'eman", and they give a reason for their words: that Krias Shema contains 248 words corresponding to the number of a person's limbs, except that four are missing'. And see the Beis Yosef and the Bach regarding his intent that four words are missing. And note also the minhag cited in Magen Avos of Rabbeinu HaMeiri, topic 1, who cited that they would answer "Amen" and counted this toward completing the words, and this is his wording: *'And there were 248 words with that "Amen" that they had in place of "Kel Melech Ne'eman"'.* And see also the Ramban, Brochos 11b: 'And it is possible that they would answer actual "Amen", but the Midrash counts the letters of "Amen"..' ↩
9 Part 1, Din Kedushah MiYushav, os 4 ↩
10 Part 1, 31b. Cited in the Beis Yosef, siman 61; and see there regarding this minhag ↩
11 Shu"t, part 2, siman 236 ↩
[2] (Halacha 1117)
The 248 Words
In the previous halacha (number 1114) we saw in the words of our Rishonim the various minhogim regarding the completion of the 248 words in the recitation of Krias Shema.
The Rishonim discussed the halachic difficulties in each minhag, and there are Rishonim who completely rejected the addition of the words, as Rabbeinu Menachem HaMeiri described in his book Magen Avos1: 'It is an ancient minhag in these lands from days of old, in the days of the great Rabbis, and likewise in the land of France and in Ashkenaz, that after the bracha "Ahavas Olam", when they come to begin Krias Shema, they say "Kel Melech Ne'eman". But in truth this minhag did not exist, neither in the western land, in Eretz Yisroel, nor in the eastern land, nor in the land of Catalonia, which was formerly part of the land of Sefarad. And there have already reached our hands machzorim from the land of Catalonia, written in very ancient times, in which [this minhag] did not exist, for their custom was like the land of Sefarad in most matters or in all of them. And in the days of Rabbi Zerachiah HaLevi, who left in his youth from the city of Gerona and merited to study in the tower of Lunel, and stayed there a long time, and returned there, he instituted there for all the members of the community the minhag of this land, and it was fixed in their machzorim in the way that it is fixed in our machzorim. And when the turn came of the great Rav, the Ramban z"l, he saw that previously they did not have this custom, and that in all the land of Sefarad they did not say it, and it was difficult in his eyes that they were saying it — in addition to the fact that the Rav was the disputant of the Rav Rabbi Zerachiah and wrote glosses on his book, to the point that he composed from this an honored book which he called Sefer Milchamos. And the Rav z"l testified that he asked about this the eminent Rav, Rabbeinu Meir of Toledo, and that the Rav z"l answered him that it is a mistake, and that it is not said in all of Sefarad, nor in Eretz Yisroel; and the minhag was abolished at the word of the Rav and erased from the machzorim, and the Rav took satisfaction for himself and gave praise and thanks to G-d that this error was abolished through him'.
And below we will bring four points [two in this halacha, and two in the next halacha] that were discussed in the words of the Rishonim:
a) The bracha "Ahavas Olam" is a bracha of Krias Shema, and saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" constitutes an interruption between the bracha and Krias Shema:
The Ramban wrote2: 'There was already a minhag in the towns to say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" between "Ahavas Olam" and Krias Shema, and in my youth it was difficult for me, since it is known that "Ahavas Olam" is the bracha on the mitzvah of Krias Shema, for all the mitzvos require a bracha before their performance .. and the bracha "Ahavas Olam" is the bracha on the mitzvah for the obligation of reading the Shema; and so too it is proven in the passage where the appointee said to them, "Recite one bracha" etc. Therefore they also made the bracha "Emes V'Yatziv" a bracha adjoining its fellow. And since this is a bracha on the mitzvah, it is entirely clear that whoever recites a bracha on mitzvos or on fruits and answers "Amen" after himself between the bracha and the mitzvah is completely mistaken .. and it seems that it is an interruption and he must go back and recite the bracha again; and so too [is implied] in the passage of "Take, recite the bracha; take, recite the bracha"3. And since they had the custom, I needed to ask the Rav Rabbi Meir HaLevi, and he answered that it is clear that it is a mistake and it is not the custom in Sefarad nor in Eretz Yisroel; and this error was abolished from its place'.
But the Meiri elaborated to resolve this, and wrote: 'It turns out in any case that our reasoning is in agreement that "Kel Melech Ne'eman" is neither an interruption nor ignorance. And that is because anything said by enactment of the Sages is neither an interruption nor ignorance; for regarding juxtaposing geulah to tefillah, they said thus: "But Rabbi Yochanan said that one says 'Hashem Sefasai Tiftach' etc." — meaning, and it would be an interruption to its juxtaposition; and he answered that since the Rabbis instituted it, it is considered like part of the geulah. And likewise, regarding eating in the sukkah, one recites "HaMotzi" and after it recites "Leishev BaSukkah", and they were not concerned to put the bracha on dwelling in the sukkah first because of the interruption between the bracha "HaMotzi" and eating the bread; for since one does so by force of an enactment, there is no interruption here. And this too was instituted, to say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", based on the Midrash ..'.
b) Any verse that Moshe did not divide:
The Rashbash wrote4: 'And in any case, as for what he said, that one should not begin from "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim", and they rebuke one who begins from there — that was not the custom, but rather to begin from the start of the verse; because in the Gemara, in Perek Bnei Ha'ir and in Perek B'shlosha Perakim, we say that any verse that Moshe a"h did not divide, we do not divide; so how shall we divide the verse without need? And furthermore, a hundred is included in two hundred; and if we need to complete 248, and only three are missing, and we read six, we have completed the 248. And what need is there to divide the verse and transgress the words of Chazal, who said that any verse that Moshe did not divide, we do not divide? Therefore it is more fitting to rebuke one who begins in the middle of the verse, and not one who reads the entire verse. And so was the practice of my father and master, the Maharashbatz z"l, when he would lead the prayers before the ark on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur'.
And it is written in Shu"t Yachin U'Boaz5: 'And there is one who said that one should begin from the start of the verse, because in the Gemara, in Perek Bnei Ha'ir, they say that any verse that Moshe did not divide, we do not divide; so how shall we divide the verse without need? And furthermore, a hundred is included in two hundred; and if we need to complete 248, and only three are missing, and we read six, we have completed the 2486; and what need is there to divide the verse and transgress the words of the Sages, who said that any verse that Moshe did not divide, we do not divide? And so was the practice of my grandfather, the Rashbatz z"l, and my father and master, the Rav z"l, and my brother, the Rav Rabbi Tzemach z"l, when they would lead the prayers before the ark: not to divide the verse, and they would begin from "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim", and they would juxtapose "Emes" to "V'Yatziv", not to "Elokeichem". And so it appears that this is the opinion of the masters of the hidden wisdom, to juxtapose "Emes" to "V'Yatziv", for behold, they combined from "Emes" until "V'Yafeh" fifteen vavs, beginning with the alef of "Emes" and concluding with the hei of "V'Yafeh" — all together amounting to 21, corresponding to "Ehe-yeh"; and this is a fine reason for juxtaposing "Emes V'Yatziv"'.
And the Ratzbash wrote in a gloss: 'The author says: since the Rav z"l, by way of the hidden wisdom, mentioned the statement from the Zohar cited in Midrash Rus, from which they learned the chazzan's completion of the 248, it appears from it that he must say specifically "ה' אלהיכם אמת". Furthermore, what he said, "any verse that Moshe did not divide etc." — behold, the beginning of the verse is not from "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim", but only "Hashem Elokeichem"; if so, according to the words of the book, since any verse that Moshe did not divide etc., from there we would need to begin, not from "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim", which is the middle of the verse. And this matter my father, the author of the book zlh"h, already mentioned, and his words bear this difficulty too. And I have already been asked about this matter, and the difficulty stood before me like a high mountain, since the matter is clear that the beginning of the verse is "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", until my son — may G-d guard him and guide him on the path of truth — said that on the word "Mitzrayim" there is a zakef katon, and the division of the cantillation marks is a halacha l'Moshe miSinai, as mentioned in Perek Ein Bein HaMudar. If so, the Rav z"l said well here, "any division that Moshe did not divide etc." — meaning, those who begin "ה' אלהיכם אמת" divided the verse in a place where Moshe did not divide it; but they rely on the statements of the Zohar. And since the communities of Catalonia, in their minhag, follow everything according to the discussion and method of the Talmud, therefore they begin "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim" for the aforementioned reason, that there Moshe divided it. End of the words of the Ratzbash zlh"h'7.
Notes:
1 Topic 1 (and see there, where he elaborated on all of this) ↩
2 See Ramban, Brochos 11b ↩
3 Brochos 4b ↩
4 Shu"t, siman 36 ↩
5 Part 2, siman 2 ↩
6 See Ra'avyah, siman 536. Cited in the Rosh, Rosh Hashanah, chapter 4, siman 3; and in the Mordechai, Rosh Hashanah, remez 720; the Rema and the Alter Rebbe, Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim, siman 263, se'if 1 ↩
7 And see Shu"t Chasam Sofer, Orach Chaim, siman 10; Shu"t Rav Pe'alim, part 1, Orach Chaim, siman 11; Siddur of the Alter Rebbe – Raskin, part 3, 1516, note 31 ↩
[3] (Halacha 1118)
The 248 Words
In the previous halacha we saw two points that the Rishonim discussed regarding the minhag of completing the 248 words: a) an interruption between the brochos of Krias Shema and Krias Shema; b) stopping in the middle of a verse. Now we will see two more issues:
c) An addition that was not said:
The Ramah wrote, cited in the Tur1: 'And furthermore, since it is not for the sake of the bracha but rather to complete the 248 words, it is an addition to Krias Shema; and this addition — neither Yaakov said it, nor his sons, nor did Moshe say it; if so, how do we say it? Now, "Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso L'olam Va'ed" — had Yaakov not said it, we would not say it; and even though Yaakov said it, we say it only silently; and shall we rise and say on our own something that neither Yaakov nor Moshe said, and that is found neither in the Mishnah nor in the Gemara? Rather, it is clear that this minhag has no basis; and whoever is able to remove it without dispute, but in a group where all are of one mind, does well; and whoever is unable to remove it should remove it for himself'.
However, the Beis Yosef wrote: 'And it appears to me that even though the Ramah overturned this minhag because it is found neither in the Mishnah nor in the Gemara, nevertheless it appears that it was an ancient minhag, but afterward they abolished it so as not to interrupt between "HaBocher B'amo Yisroel" and "Shema", and they instituted in its place that the chazzan repeat "ה' אלהיכם אמת", for so it is in Sefer HaTikkunim .. And so is the custom of the Sefardim, not to say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", and to complete the three words the chazzan repeats "ה' אלהיכם אמת"; for at first he concludes the parsha of Tzitzis and says "Emes", and then he repeats and says aloud "ה' אלהיכם אמת". And so it is written in the Zohar at the end of Parshas Vayera Eilav Hashem, that in Krias Shema there are 248 words with "ה' אלהיכם אמת". And so it is written in the Midrash HaNe'elam2 ..'.
d) Saying "Emes" twice:
The Rashbash wrote3: 'You further asked: for you found in the name of a student of Rabbi Yom Tov Al-Ishbili z"l that the chazzan must repeat three words aloud, and they are "ה' אלהיכם אמת", to complete the 248 words, and that the chazzanim who repeat "V'lihyos Lachem L'Elokim" are mistaken and it is proper to rebuke them and prevent them. And it was difficult for you that if so, he must repeat "Emes, Emes" twice. Answer: You have spoken truly, that one should not say "Emes" twice; for in the Gemara, in Perek Hayah Korei, we ask: Does one repeat and say "Emes", or does one not repeat and say "Emes"? Rabbi Abahu in the name of Rabbi Yochanan said: He repeats and says "Emes"; Rabbi Abba said: He does not repeat and say "Emes". That one who went down before Rava said "Emes, Emes" twice; Rava said: The whole "Emes, Emes" has seized this one. And since the Talmud brings this incident, it implies that the halacha follows Rava, and so ruled our Rabbis z"l. But it appears that there is an error in the book, and it should read "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"; and "Emes" is not from the Mikra, so why does he complete with it? And those who wrote that he completes the count of 248 say that they repeat "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"; but to repeat "Emes" or to complete with it is not correct, for the Ramah z"l rebuked those who complete with "Kel Melech Ne'eman" — first, that it is an interruption, and further, that neither Moshe nor Yaakov a"h said it, so how shall we complete with it? And the same law applies to completing with "Emes". Rather, the completion is with "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", with these three words'.
And the Beis Yosef wrote: 'And it can be said that it is different there, for he mentioned "Emes" twice without interruption; but here, where he repeats and says "ה' אלהיכם אמת", it is fine. And know this, for that one who went down before Rava, whom he heard say "Emes, Emes", was without interruption, since it is brought in connection with the dispute of whether one repeats and says "Emes" or does not repeat; and regarding that, Rabbeinu Yonah explained4 that he said "ה' אלהיכם אמת" and waits until the chazzan finishes Krias Shema, and it says that when the chazzan reaches "Emes" he does not repeat and say "Emes" — thus it is a case where he does not interrupt between "Emes" and "Emes". And also according to what he explained, that when he said "ה' אלקיכם אמת" and stopped out of fear or out of respect, and it says that he does not repeat and say "Emes" even though he interrupted between them with other words — it can be said that interrupting out of fear or out of respect is not common for the chazzan but only for an individual, and an individual certainly does not repeat these three words, as we have explained above. Therefore Rava said "The whole 'Emes, Emes' has seized him" only when he repeats only the word "Emes" alone, as is proven from Rava's wording, "The whole 'Emes, Emes' has seized this one", and Rashi explained: the haste of "Emes" has seized this one; and this applies only to one who says "Emes" twice without the interruption of another word. But if he repeats and says "ה' אלהיכם אמת", it is fine. And if you will say: in the end, from that one who went down it is implied that they did not have the custom of repeating "ה' אלהיכם אמת", and also since Rava said "The whole 'Emes, Emes' has seized this one" and did not say to him "Why did you not repeat 'ה' אלהיכם אמת'?" — it can be said that the one who went down was mistaken, and this is what Rava was saying: "The whole 'Emes, Emes' has seized this one", meaning that he should not have repeated "Emes" alone but rather "ה' אלהיכם אמת". And if you will say that Rava did not say that he should repeat anything, it can be said that Rava had the custom of saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" according to the minhag of the early ones, and if so he does not need to repeat any word; but one who does not have the custom of saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" — Rava agrees that he must repeat "ה' אלהיכם אמת". Therefore we, who do not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", even according to Rava must repeat "ה' אלהיכם אמת"'.
And the Rema in Darkei Moshe5 wrote: 'And it is written in Toldos Adam V'Chava, path 3, part 26, that an individual who says "ה' אלהיכם אמת" in an undertone should not repeat a second time to say "Emes" with the chazzan, for it is as if he said "Shema" twice, for which they silence him. End quote. And it is possible that if he repeats all three words, there is no problem, and so I have seen many practice'.
> Thus we have seen four issues in the Rishonim regarding the minhag of completing the 248 words; in the next halacha we will see how it was ruled in practice
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 61 ↩
2 Zohar Chadash, Rus 95a ↩
3 Shu"t, siman 36 ↩
4 Brochos 8a, s.v. Chozer ↩
5 Se'if katan 2 ↩
6 24a ↩
[4] (Halacha 1119)
The 248 Words - With the Congregation
In the previous halachos we saw the words of the Rishonim regarding the minhag of completing the 248 words.
One who davens with the congregation:
The Mechaber writes1: 'In Krias Shema there are 245 words, and in order to complete 248, corresponding to the limbs of a person, the shliach tzibbur concludes "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and repeats and says aloud "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'.
And the Rema writes there in his gloss: 'And through this every person fulfills the obligation, since they hear these three words from the mouth of the shliach tzibbur. And if the individual also wishes to say them together with the shliach tzibbur, there is no prohibition in the matter'2.
And the Magen Avraham writes3: 'There is no prohibition. But he does not say "Emes" alone with the shliach tzibbur, for that is like "Shema, Shema" [Darkei Moshe]. And the Knesses HaGedolah wrote that he is not silenced, and only if he paused in between'.
However, the Maharshal4 writes: 'When I daven on the day of my father z"l's passing, I repeat at the end "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", which are three words, without "Emes", to complete the 248 words of Krias Shema and to join them to "Emes"; but not that the word "Emes", which is not from Krias Shema, should fill in words of Krias Shema. And so I found in Sefer Me'ah She'arim in the name of a certain Kabbalist'5.
And there are communities that did not follow the minhag of completing the words to 248 at all, and the Magen Avraham writes there: 'And in a place where they are not accustomed to repeat, we do not protest against them [Panim Chadashos (Hilchos Krias Shema U'Birchoseha 2, 1) in the name of R"L Chaviv, siman 73, and R"M Alshakar, siman 66, and Rashach, siman 31, and Re'em, vol. 1, siman 1, and see there siman 2]6.
And regarding the manner in which the chazzan says it, the Re'em7 writes: 'Rather, certainly they say it quietly so as not to interrupt between "Elokeichem" and "Emes", and he repeats it aloud in order to complete the 248 words for the congregation, in such a way that both he and they are set right, and the one who completes is complete and not lacking .. And beneath this question ten chazzanim from Salonika wrote, and each one testified by his own signature how they had conducted themselves all their days in their service as chazzan, whether in Spain or in Seville and in all those places, and in Salonika before all the sages: to serve as chazzan and to say quietly "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and they would repeat aloud "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and no sage protested against them'.
And so writes the Mahariksh in Erech Lechem: 'The practice is that one time he says it quietly, and the second time, which he says in order to fulfill the obligation for the congregation, he says it aloud. And the reason is that since "Emes" is the seal of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, if he says it aloud twice it appears like two authorities'.
And the Magen Avraham writes8: 'And in Sefer Asarah Ma'amaros מאכ"ח, part 1, siman 13, he writes that the shliach tzibbur does not say "Emes" quietly, and an individual says "Emes" quietly and does not repeat and say "Emes", and it turns out that there are exactly 248 words; but if he says "Emes" quietly and repeats and says "Emes", there are 249 words — end of his words. And with this the plain meaning of the Talmud is resolved, which says he does not repeat and say "Emes"; and the Beis Yosef strained to explain this, see there. But R"M Alshakar writes that one should say "Emes" the first time too, so as not to separate between them, and the second "Emes" is not part of the count, but rather is the text of the bracha of Emes VeYatziv'.
And these are the words of the Alter Rebbe9: 'In Krias Shema there are 245 words, and three words are lacking to complete 248, corresponding to the limbs of a person; for whoever reads Krias Shema properly, each limb takes one word and is healed by it. Therefore the practice is that the shliach tzibbur repeats and says "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" aloud, and through this every person fulfills the obligation, since they hear these three words from the mouth of the shliach tzibbur. And the entire congregation, when they read quietly to themselves, say "Ani Hashem Elokeichem Emes" and wait for the shliach tzibbur, and afterwards they begin "VeYatziv", and they do not repeat and say "Emes"; for whoever says "Emes, Emes" without an interruption of another word in between is as if he says "Shema, Shema", who is silenced if he did not pause at all in between, as will be explained; and even if he paused somewhat, one should not initially double it without an interruption of another word in between. But if each individual wishes to repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" together with the shliach tzibbur, there is no prohibition in the matter, since he interrupts between "Emes" and "Emes" with the words "Hashem Elokeichem". And as for the shliach tzibbur, some are accustomed not to say "Emes" when he reads quietly to himself, for if he says "Emes" quietly and repeats and says "Emes" aloud, there will be 249 words; and some are accustomed to say "Emes" quietly as well, so as not to separate between "Hashem Elokeichem" and "Emes", and the second "Emes" is not part of the count, but rather is the text of the bracha of Emes VeYatziv'.
> Thus we have seen that in practice it has been accepted that the shliach tzibbur says the words "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" quietly, and then repeats "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" once more aloud. In the next halacha we will discuss what one should do if he is in the middle of the brochos of Krias Shema and the chazzan has already finished.
Notes:
1 Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 61, se'if 3 ↩
2 The Kaf HaChaim writes, se'if katan 14: 'And so is the minhag of Beis El יכב"ץ, *that each and every one repeats and says "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" to himself together with the shliach tzibbur, and they do not rely on the shliach tzibbur's recitation*, because each and every one wishes to have in mind for himself the kavanah pertaining to these three words, which is written in the Siddur of the Rashash z"l'. And he further writes there, se'if katan 13: 'And therefore it is fitting, *when he is in doubt about the chazzan, whether he knows and intends to fulfill the obligation for others or not, that he himself repeat these three words and not rely on the chazzan*. Chesed LaAlafim, os 3' ↩
3 There, se'if katan 2 ↩
4 Shu"t, siman 64 ↩
5 And see what his disciple writes in the Mateh Moshe, siman 89, to defend his minhag against the questions of the Beis Yosef. And see what is written in Shu"t HaRalbach, siman 73, and Maharam Alshakar, siman 66, regarding the communities that followed the minhag of the Maharshal ↩
6 It should be noted that some of the references do not deal with communities that did not say it at all, but only with those that followed the minhag of the Maharshal, who doubled only "Ani Hashem Elokeichem" without the word "Emes" ↩
7 Shu"t Rabbi Eliyahu Mizrachi, siman 2 ↩
8 There, se'if katan 1 ↩
9 There, se'if 3 ↩
[5] (Halacha 1120)
The 248 Words
Question: What should one do if he is in the middle of Krias Shema and the shliach tzibbur has already finished and is repeating "Hashem Elokeichem"?
Answer: Sefer Seder HaYom1 writes: 'And Krias Shema has 248 words less three, and with the shliach tzibbur's repetition of "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" he completes 248, corresponding to the number of a person's limbs. Therefore one must have intent when hearing them from the shliach tzibbur; and one who does not have intent in them is lacking those three limbs, and it is "a crookedness that cannot be straightened". For by saying these 248 words he subjugates all his 248 limbs to the service of our G-d, and each one has a share in the service that entire day; and when some of them are lacking and he has not completed the count, he appears like one with a blemish, and not all his limbs have merited to complete the service .. Even so, it is better to have intent on the words that the chazzan utters, which are of Krias Shema itself, and initially to repeat them after this, and with this he completes his intent. Therefore every G-d-fearing person must endeavor to read Krias Shema together with the congregation word for word; and if he finished first, he should wait in order to have intent on those words; and if the congregation finished first, he should hurry and hasten to finish in order to hear the words in their place; and if he cannot catch up to them because the gap between them is great, he should stand in his place, be silent, and listen to the shliach tzibbur, and afterwards finish. (And it appears to me that this is effective for him, since he is standing within Krias Shema and these are the 248 themselves)'.
And the Maamar Mordechai writes2: 'It appears to me that one who did not finish Krias Shema exactly together with the shliach tzibbur, but rather when the shliach tzibbur repeats these three words he has reached there, should be silent and listen to the shliach tzibbur, and afterwards he should finish his reading, and it will count for him toward completing the 248 — for what difference is it to me whether the shliach tzibbur says them first or he says them first, as stated above. And so I did on my own reasoning; and then, after several days, I found something greater than this in the name of the Seder HaYom: that if he is in the middle of Krias Shema he should be silent and listen to the shliach tzibbur, and it will count for him toward the 248, since he is engaged in Krias Shema — see there in its place'.
And the Sha'arei Teshuvah writes3: 'And in the Shalmei Tzibbur4 he writes in the name of the Mateh Yehudah5, who writes that the fact that he has intent to hear from the shliach tzibbur in the middle of Krias Shema is not considered like reading out of order, only with regard to fulfilling his obligation, but not with regard to being considered an interruption; and what he hears from the mouth of the shliach tzibbur is not like reading it himself, but rather he fulfills what is incumbent upon him as an obligation, to complete 248 words, and he reads Krias Shema in its order'.
> Thus, according to their words, initially one should endeavor to keep pace with the chazzan; but one who did not succeed and is still in the middle of Krias Shema should be silent and listen to the shliach tzibbur, who doubles the words, and afterwards continue reciting Krias Shema.
However, the Kaf HaChaim6 writes that this is not correct according to Kabbalah: 'However, according to what the Rav z"l wrote in Sha'ar HaKavanos, end of Drush 5 and Drush 8 of Krias Shema, and Drush 9 of the Drushim of the night, and in the Siddur of the Rashash z"l .. if so, this kavanah is not achieved unless he says it in order — that is, until he completes all three parshiyos up to "Hashem Elokeichem", and afterwards he repeats and says "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"; and if not, he reverses and confuses the order that is effected above, Heaven forbid. And if so, there is no remedy other than either to hear from the mouth of the shliach tzibbur and have intent to fulfill the obligation if he is at the same point as him, or to repeat them himself; but to hear them not in their place and have intent to fulfill the obligation is not acceptable according to the words of the Kabbalists. And likewise, to have intent on the fifteen vavs and thereby fulfill the obligation of doubling the three words "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" is not acceptable according to the words of the Kabbalists, for he confuses the order; rather, either he should hear from the mouth of the shliach tzibbur, or he himself should say "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", as mentioned .. And also what the Maamar Mordechai wrote there — that one who did not finish Krias Shema exactly together with the shliach tzibbur, but rather when the shliach tzibbur repeats these three words he has reached there, should be silent and listen to the shliach tzibbur, and afterwards finish his reading, and it will count for him toward completing the 248, for what difference is it whether the shliach tzibbur says them first or he says them first, end of his words — does not appear correct, for the repetition is a different kavanah, as written above, and how can it be before he finishes? He would be reversing [the order]. Rather, if such a thing happened, he should not have intent on the shliach tzibbur, but should repeat and say them himself, as written'.
And in the Shulchan HaTahor7 he writes that since he is silent in order to fulfill the obligation, this is an interruption: 'If he is standing in the middle of Krias Shema, he should not be silent and have intent on what the shliach tzibbur says, "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'. And he explained there in a note: 'For it is an interruption, since wherever one must fulfill the obligation through silence, "one who hears is like one who answers", and in the middle it is an interruption'.
In practice, the Rebbe8 was asked this question and answered: 'Regarding his question about completing the three words in Krias Shema through the shliach tzibbur saying "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" — for the time being I have not found an explicit ruling on this. But in my opinion it is simple: a) that he fulfills the obligation for his entire congregation; b) also one who has not yet finished Krias Shema is part of his congregation, and the three words are added for him while he is reciting Krias Shema'.
And based on this it is written in Sefer HaMinhogim9: 'Also one who has not yet finished Krias Shema — the shliach tzibbur fulfills his obligation by his saying "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" (that is, he completes the three words for the one davening, since this is while he is reciting Krias Shema)'.
In the Notes and References to the Siddur Im Dach10 this ruling is brought with an addition: 'One who is standing in the middle of Krias Shema when the shliach tzibbur concludes "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" — should pause and listen11, and it counts for him toward the count of 248'.
And regarding12 the claim that the silence constitutes an interruption by virtue of the principle of "one who hears is like one who answers", the Alter Rebbe already explained13: 'Even to answer Kaddish, Barchu, and Kedushah, one should not interrupt during Shemoneh Esrei; rather, he should be silent and have intent on what the shliach tzibbur says, and it will be as if he answered with his mouth, for one who hears is like one who answers everywhere; and nevertheless this is not considered an interruption of the tefillah, since he does not utter it with his mouth; and when the shliach tzibbur reaches "Yisbarach VeYishtabach" in Kaddish, he returns to his tefillah'.
> Thus, in practice, the shliach tzibbur, by completing the three words, fulfills the obligation also for one who is in the middle of reciting Krias Shema; but he must be silent and hear the words from the shliach tzibbur, and afterwards continue with Krias Shema.
--------------
Notes:
1 Kavanas Krias Shema VeHaYichud ↩
2 Orach Chaim, siman 61, se'if 2 ↩
3 There, se'if katan 2 ↩
4 99b ↩
5 Vol. 2, Likutei Orach Chaim 60, 3 ↩
6 There, se'if katan 16 ↩
7 There, din 2 ↩
8 Igros Kodesh, vol. 19, p. 450 ↩
9 P. 11 ↩
10 Vol. 2, p. 952 ↩
11 In Agurah BeOholcha (Perkash), vol. 1, siman 70, 2, note 2, it is brought that Rabbi Feivel Rimler related: In the year 5710 the Rebbe davened in the room of the Rebbe Rayatz, and at the end of every tefillah the Rebbe would walk from the place where he had davened to the yechidus table and look at the candles on it. Since my place during the tefillos was opposite the table, the Rebbe passed by me on his way there. Once, at the end of the tefillah, I took advantage of the fact that the Rebbe was next to me and asked him how one should conduct himself when one hears the chazzan saying the words "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" while one is in the middle of Krias Shema, and the Rebbe answered me — *'מדארף בלייבן שטיל צוהערן דעם חזן ולהמשיך הלאה'* [= one must be silent, listen to the chazzan, and continue onward] ↩
12 See Agurah BeOholcha there ↩
13 Hilchos Tefillah, siman 104, se'if 5 ↩
[6] (Halacha 1121)
The 248 Words
One who davens alone (1):
Regarding one who davens alone, we find several approaches as to whether and how it is possible to complete the 248 words, as follows:
a) The Zohar Chadash writes1: 'And whoever says Krias Shema not with the congregation does not complete his limbs, because he is lacking the three words that the shliach tzibbur repeats. What is his remedy? He should have intent on the fifteen vavs of Emes VeYatziv. And with all this, Abba would apply to him "מעוות לא יוכל לתקן וגו'" ("What is crooked cannot be made straight" etc.) — those three words of Krias Shema that the shliach tzibbur repeats, he cannot count them toward the completion of 248 as the shliach tzibbur does'.
And the Tzror HaMor explains2: 'And the reason that appears to me is that these three words are like one Name of Hashem. Therefore one should not interrupt between "Vayomer" and "Emes VeYatziv", because it is written "וה' אלהים אמת הוא אלהים חיים" ("But Hashem G-d is truth; He is the living G-d") — that is to say, what is the reason He is truth? Because He is the living G-d. For human beings, since they die, cannot fulfill their words; and this is "לא איש אל ויכזב" ("G-d is not a man, that He should lie"). And the fifteen vavs correspond to the Name Yud-Hei, which equals fifteen, and it is like a complete Name. For Yud Hei spelled out in full equals twenty-six, like the Name Havayah. Therefore, corresponding to the Name Havayah, which is faithful, came the first five vavs, which are: VeYatziv, VeNachon, VeKayam, VeYashar, VeNe'eman. And corresponding to "Elokeichem", which is "awesome in praises", came the five middle vavs, which are: VeAhuv, VeChaviv, VeNechmad, VeNa'im, VeNora. And corresponding to "Emes" — for the beauty of all things is truth — came the last five vavs, which are: VeAdir, UMesukan, UMekubal, VeTov, VeYafeh. As they said: "You have spoken well, you have spoken truly — I will not see your face again". And one who has intent in this, it is as if he says "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'.
And the Mechaber writes3: 'And if he reads alone, he should have intent on the fifteen vavs in Emes VeYatziv, which equal 90, and they correspond to three Names of Havayah, for each Name equals 26, and [with] its four letters they are 30'.
And the Eliyah Rabbah4 writes: 'And I found that fifteen vavs equal 90, and 90 is three lameds, and the form of the lamed is yud, vav, yud — thus three times 26, like the numerical value of the four-letter Name three times'.
The Rema brings an additional kavanah there in his gloss: 'And there is yet another reason for the matter: fifteen vavs equal 90, and the reading is counted as one, making 91, the numerical value of the Name as it is read and as it is written, and it is as if he said "Hashem Ad-noy Emes"'.
And in the Biur HaGra he writes: 'And the words of the Rav are primary: firstly, because thirteen vavs would suffice; and furthermore, because "Emes" interrupts between them; and furthermore, because it corresponds to "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and likewise here, these two Names'.
> Thus we have seen that the individual completes the three words through intent on the fifteen vavs of Emes VeYatziv.
b) The Rema writes there: 'And some have written that whoever reads Krias Shema alone should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman, Shema" etc., for these three words complete the count of 248, and it is in place of the "Amen" that one should answer after "Baruch HaBocher BeAmo Yisrael BeAhavah"; and so is the practice. And it appears to me that nevertheless, when he reads with the congregation, he should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", but rather say "Amen" after the shliach tzibbur when he concludes the bracha; and so is the practice, and it is proper'. And the Divrei Chamudos agreed with him5.
However, the Mateh Moshe6 brought the words of the Rema and wrote: 'And my teacher, Mahar"sh z"l, would not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", neither with the congregation nor alone. And this is correct, for if they were particular not to say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" because of an interruption, what difference is there between an individual and a congregation? And furthermore, all those who wrote that one should have intent on the fifteen vavs were speaking of an individual; we learn from this that they all hold that even an individual should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman"'.
The Taz7 also writes: '"And so is the practice" — my father-in-law z"l wrote that now this minhag has been discontinued, and they do not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", and they rely on the Zohar, which wrote that the three words are completed through the shliach tzibbur repeating and saying "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'8.
And the Magen Avraham writes9: '"He should say Kel Melech Ne'eman" — and in the Mateh Moshe he writes that the Rashal did not want to interrupt; and in the Beis Yosef it is implied that it is an ancient minhag, and so writes the Bach'.
The Eliyah Rabbah10 writes to distinguish between Shacharis and Maariv: 'And it appears to me to decide that in Shacharis, when the individual can have intent on the fifteen vavs, he should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman"; but in Maariv, where there is no other remedy, he should say it. However, I saw in the Shelah and the Mateh Moshe another remedy11 ..'.
And these are the words of the Alter Rebbe12: 'And one who does not read Krias Shema with the congregation, regarding him it is said "וחסרון לא יוכל להמנות" ("and what is lacking cannot be counted") — these three words that he lacks from the count of 248. Nevertheless, he has some remedy: to have intent on the fifteen vavs in Emes VeYatziv. Some explain this kavanah: that fifteen vavs equal 90, and they correspond to three Names of Havayah, for each one equals 26, and [with] its four letters they are 30. And some explain that fifteen vavs equal 90, and with the reading it is 91, the numerical value of the Name as it is read and as it is written, and it is as if he said "Hashem Ad-noy Emes". And some say another remedy for one who reads alone: that he should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman, Shema" etc., and these three words complete the count of 248, and they are in place of the "Amen" that one should answer after "HaBocher BeAmo Yisrael BeAhavah", for "Amen" is the acronym of "Kel Melech Ne'eman". Nevertheless, when he reads with the congregation, he should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", but rather say "Amen" after the shliach tzibbur when he concludes the bracha; and so is the practice in these countries'.
> Thus we have seen two ways in which an individual completes the 248 words: a) intent on the fifteen vavs of Emes VeYatziv; b) saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" before "Shema Yisrael" [but many poskim cast doubt on this remedy]. In the next halacha we will see a third way, and the Chabad minhag.
Notes:
1 Rus 30b ↩
2 Parshas Ki Savo ↩
3 Orach Chaim, siman 61, se'if 3 ↩
4 There, se'if katan 5 ↩
5 Brochos, ch. 2, os 33 ↩
6 Siman 90 ↩
7 There, se'if katan 2 ↩
8 However, see what the Pri Megadim and the Levushei Serad discussed regarding his words, and which passage in the Rema he was referring to ↩
9 Se'if katan 4 ↩
10 There, se'if katan 6 ↩
11 This will be brought in a separate halacha regarding completing the three words in the tefillah of Maariv ↩
12 There, se'if 4 ↩
[7] (Halacha 1123)
The 248 Words - An Individual
One who davens alone (2):
In the previous halacha we saw, from the words of the Zohar and the Rishonim, two ways in which an individual should conduct himself regarding completing the words at the end of Krias Shema. In this halacha we will see further ways that are brought in the Acharonim:
c) The Chida writes in Birkei Yosef1: 'And according to what is stated in the Yerushalmi, if he reads alone he is permitted to double "Hashem Elokeichem". And so the Rav, the Bach, and the Rav, the Pri Chadash, agreed with the words of the Yerushalmi. And I heard that Maharchu zt"l wrote that Rabbeinu the Arizal zt"l conducted himself so. And so the Raavad distinguished regarding requests and the mention of His praises, may He be blessed; the Rav, the Shibbolei HaLeket, brought it, siman 82'. And based on this, the Kesher Gudal2 writes: 'If he reads alone, he is permitted to double "Hashem Elokeichem". (Birkei Yosef, siman 61)'.
And in the Minchas Elazar3 he writes [and see also the Kaf HaChaim4]: 'Let the matter not be astonishing in his eyes: even though we follow the Rema in saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" when alone, as has been published in their siddur, nevertheless in the Birkei Yosef he writes that he heard in the name of the writings of Maharchu z"l that Rabbeinu the Arizal would double "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" even when alone, and the Sha'arei Teshuvah brought it there, siman 61. And so I heard that our master, the holy Gaon, the teacher of all the children of the Diaspora, of Sanz zy"a, author of the Divrei Chaim, conducted himself. Now, even though I, the young one, already wrote and printed in the glosses on the Siddur Chemdas Yisrael of Mahar"sh Vital zt"l (which was printed here in the holy community of Munkatch in the year 5661), in the table of corrections at its end, where I wrote to express astonishment at what the Gaon wrote in the Birkei Yosef in the name of Maharchu, as mentioned — and I did not know, since before us, in Sha'ar HaKavanos and in Pri Etz Chaim and in all the siddurim of the Arizal, it is not found so, if so, from where is the report that the Rav, the Chida zt"l, heard, that it is found so. However, after the printing, a certain outstanding scholar showed me in Sha'ar HaKavanos, Sha'ar 9 of the Drushim of the night, in the kavanah of Krias Shema al HaMitah, where he writes that after completing Krias Shema one should repeat once more "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" as the shliach tzibbur does, and thereby all 248 words will be completed — end of his words. Thus it is explicit from the Arizal that also in Krias Shema al HaMitah (which is alone) one should double these three words, and this is the report that he heard and that came into the sefer Birkei Yosef, as it appears, and I also now saw in Sefer Emes LeYaakov by Mahar"i Shealtiel Nineveh z"l (in Sfas Emes, question 52) that he too wrote to express astonishment at the aforementioned Birkei Yosef, and wrote that he did not find it so in the writings of the Arizal, and in the end wrote that he found it in the aforementioned place regarding Krias Shema al HaMitah, as above'.
> Thus we have seen that some have written that an individual should repeat the words "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", just as the shliach tzibbur repeats them, and thereby complete the words.
d) However, some rejected the third approach, that the individual should repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and wrote that only the shliach tzibbur may repeat, as the Levush writes5: 'And specifically with the congregation did they say that the shliach tzibbur repeats these three words aloud after he has said them quietly; but an individual who reads is forbidden to double these three words, for it implies two authorities, Heaven forbid, as we say regarding saying "Shema, Shema" twice, below in se'if 9. And it is not comparable to the shliach tzibbur, who reads them twice, for such is the way of the shliach tzibbur in several matters: to read quietly to fulfill his own obligation, and to repeat and make it heard to the people'.
The Alter Rebbe writes in the Siddur [and see halacha 1114]: 'In Krias Shema there are 245 words, and three words are lacking to complete the count of 248 words; therefore the practice is that the shliach tzibbur repeats and says "Hashem Elokeichem Emes". An individual davening by himself6 should repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"'7.
And in explaining the view of the Alter Rebbe8, the Sha'ar HaKollel9 writes: '"An individual davening by himself should repeat the words Ani Hashem Elokeichem" — in all the aforementioned seforim, and also in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe, siman 61, this advice is not found, only the advice that he should have intent on the fifteen vavs in Emes VeYatziv .. And after all the pieces of advice, many poskim wrote that an individual davening by himself is left with "חסרון לא יוכל להמנות" ("a lack that cannot be counted"), even if he has intent on the fifteen vavs .. And as for why the Alter Rebbe writes this advice in the Siddur, it seems one can say that it is because the Tashbetz, vol. 2, siman 236, writes that in Spain the practice is to double "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", and so they were accustomed in the locale of the Rashba — see Shu"t Chasam Sofer, Orach Chaim, siman 10. And the Rashal in his responsa, siman 64, writes that even when he would daven before the ark he was accustomed to double the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", and he holds that the word "Emes", which is not from Krias Shema, does not complete what is lacking in Krias Shema. And in the Mateh Moshe, siman 89, he reconciles the words of his teacher the Rashal based on what is brought in Shu"t Maharam Alshakar, siman 66: that what is written in the Zohar Chadash, to repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", is the view of the companions of Rashbi, but the view of Rashbi himself is to repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem". The Maharam Alshakar also brings there that Rabbi Menachem Recanati, in his commentary on the Torah, writes that he found another version in the Zohar Chadash, Midrash Rus, to repeat "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"; and see Ateres Zekenim, siman 106. And one can say that this is why the Alter Rebbe decided that, granted that regarding the shliach tzibbur one should not change from the minhag that has spread according to the poskim and Kabbalists who hold that he should repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", nevertheless regarding an individual davening by himself, so that he should not be left with "חסרון לא יוכל להמנות" ("a lack that cannot be counted"), one should conduct himself like the aforementioned great ones and repeat "Ani Hashem Elokeichem" .. In the Siddur of the Arizal, at the end of Krias Shema, in the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem Emes", the word "Emes" is adjacent to the words before it, in equally large letters like all of Krias Shema; and afterwards begins the text of the bracha after Krias Shema, "Hashem Elokeichem Emes VeEmunah Kol Zos" etc. And so the wording of the Alter Rebbe indicates: "repeats and says Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'.
> Thus, according to the view of the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur, an individual too should double the recitation of "Ani Hashem Elokeichem". In the next halacha we will see regarding the minhag of completing the 248 in Maariv
--------------
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 61, os 1 ↩
2 Siman 11, os 19 ↩
3 Shu"t, vol. 2, siman 28; and see also Darkei Chaim VeShalom, os 143 ↩
4 There, se'if katan 15 ↩
5 Orach Chaim, siman 61, se'if 5. And see also Aruch HaShulchan there, se'if 12 ↩
6 In the Ketzos HaShulchan, siman 19, se'if 24, he writes: 'An individual davening by himself [should conclude "Hashem Elokeichem", and afterwards] repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"'. (And in the Baddei HaShulchan there, os 62, he writes: 'And if the individual forgot and concluded "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", or he heard Kaddish or Kedushah at the end of Krias Shema and needed to say "Emes" immediately so that he could interrupt and answer — for if he were to wait until he repeated "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", more than the time of an utterance would pass since hearing the Kaddish, and he would no longer be able to answer — it appears that he should afterwards repeat the words "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" like the shliach tzibbur, as written in the Sha'arei Teshuvah, se'if katan 2. And if he also said "VeYatziv" before answering the Kaddish, as written above in se'if 6, he cannot afterwards repeat "Hashem Elokeichem", but rather should have intent on the fifteen vavs in Emes VeYatziv, as written in siman 61, 4, see there') ↩
7 Note what the Eshel Avraham (Buczacz) writes, siman 61: *'I further found in the siddur printed in the name of the Rav, the author of the Tanya z"l, that he wrote that an individual should say "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" twice*. And so writes the Likutei Maharich (Seder Krias Shema): 'And see the Sha'arei Teshuvah, that even if he reads alone he may repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and that this was the minhag of the Arizal; and so writes the Siddur of the Tanya (and see there that he should repeat "Ani Hashem Elokeichem Emes"), see there ..'. However, seemingly their words are not precise, and these are not the words of the Alter Rebbe, who wrote that one doubles "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", and not "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" ↩
8 And see also Libun Halachos (Schonberger), vol. 1, pp. 143–144 ↩
9 Ch. 2, os 9 ↩
[8] (Halacha 1124)
The 248 Words - Maariv
We saw in the previous halacha, from the Tikkunei Zohar [and so several poskim wrote in practice as well], that an individual davening should have intent on the fifteen vavs of Emes VeYatziv.
Question: How should an individual davening Maariv complete the 248 words?
Answer: In the words of the poskim we find several approaches and ways regarding the manner of completion, as follows:
a) Rabbi Avraham Saba writes in the Tzror HaMor1: 'And at night, when there are no vavs, they instituted it through pesukim, for they added the pesukim "בידך אפקיד רוחי פדית אותי ה' אל אמת" ("Into Your hand I entrust my spirit; You have redeemed me, Hashem, G-d of truth")2, which is in place of "Hashem Elokeichem Emes"'.
b) Rabbi Meir ibn Gabbai writes in the Tola'as Yaakov3: 'And in Maariv he should have intent on the vav of "VeEmunah", which draws out alef-vav; thus there are three letters here, vav-alef-vav. The two vavs with their inclusion — that is, from alef until vav is their inclusion of the vav — the two vavs amount to twice Ekyeh, Ekyeh; and the alef is depicted as yud-vav-yud, which is Yud Hei Vav Hei; thus there are three Names here. So I saw in Sefer HaKanah'.
And in the Pri Etz Chaim4 it is explained: 'And why the Name Ekyeh? Because of what our Sages z"l said, that one who did not say Emes VeYatziv in Shacharis and Emes VeEmunah in Maariv has not fulfilled his obligation. For in the morning, if he did not merit to say Krias Shema with the congregation, he should have intent on the fifteen vavs in Emes VeYatziv. And likewise at night, if he did not merit to say Maariv with the congregation, he should have intent on the two vavs of "VeEmunah", each one of which, with its inclusion, equals the numerical value of Ekyeh. And he said that its explanation is: alef-beis, gimmel-daled, hei-vav, which equals 21, the numerical value of Ekyeh. And as for the other word needed to complete the 248, which requires three words, he should have intent on the word "Emes", which equals 21 times Ekyeh, the numerical value of Emes; therefore twice Ekyeh are alluded to here'.
c) The Rema MiPano writes in the Asarah Ma'amaros5: 'This is what is intended for us in the word "Emes" that we add at the end of Krias Shema, on account of "ה' אלהים אמת" ("Hashem G-d is truth"). And it alone suffices for an individual who knows how to have intent in it, in place of the three words that the shliach tzibbur adds; for it is known regarding the letters of "Emes" that they are the beginning, middle, and end of the alef-beis, and so too it is the seal of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, of Whom it is written "אני ראשון" ("I am first") — above, until without end; "ואני אחרון" ("and I am last") — below, until without limit; "ומבלעדי אין אלהים" ("and besides Me there is no G-d") — in the middle of the extremities, which are not bounded at all .. However, our approach is preferable, to have intent on "Emes", for at night there are no vavs there; and nevertheless, some have intent on the word "VeEmunah", which contains "Amen", like the number of the vavs. Through this and through that, the One Above is praised. Provided only that a person directs his mind toward Heaven'.
And so writes the Mateh Moshe6: 'And were I not afraid, I would say that he should have intent on the word "Emunah", which is from the expression "Amen", and "Amen" has the numerical value of Hashem Ad-noy, as if he says "Hashem Ad-noy Emes"'.
d) The Ateres Zekenim7 writes: 'And some say that if he reads the Krias Shema of Maariv alone, he should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" (Maharshal in the glosses on the Tur, based on the Rokeach, siman 320)'.
And the Eliyah Rabbah8 writes: 'But in the Mateh Moshe he writes, and these are his words: My teacher, Mahar"sh, would not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", neither with the congregation nor alone, and this is correct, for if they were particular because of an interruption, what difference is there between an individual and a congregation — end quote. And it appears to me to decide that in Shacharis, when the individual can have intent on the fifteen vavs, he should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman"; but in Maariv, where there is no other remedy, he should say it'9.
And some wrote that in Maariv there is no need at all to complete the three words, as written in the Ateres Zekenim there: And some say that one need not complete the 248 in Maariv, because the 248 words of Krias Shema [heal] the 248 limbs of his body, since Krias Shema is aligned opposite the tefillah and they are bound together in one bond; therefore his tefillah is heard and ascends on high — which is not so with the tefillah of Maariv, which is optional. [And] in order to remove himself from the dispute, he must be careful to read Krias Shema with the congregation and to have intent on what the shliach tzibbur repeats, in order to complete his limbs ..'.
And the Maamar Mordechai10: 'And nevertheless it appears that one need not be so particular regarding the Krias Shema of Maariv, for we see in the Shas that one is not obligated to read the parsha of tzitzis at night, and if so, it is obvious that several words were lacking; and it seems to me that so I saw in the sefer Tzror HaMor, and nevertheless he writes there that one should have intent on the pasuk "פדית אותי ה' אל אמת", which corresponds to the three Names "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", see there'.
And the Kaf HaChaim writes11: 'And as for what the Maamar Mordechai wrote .. that in Maariv one need not be so particular — according to the words of Rabbeinu the Arizal there is no distinction between Shacharis and Maariv, and even in Krias Shema al HaMitah one must complete the 248 words, as written above, os 15'.
And regarding what he wrote, that even in Krias Shema al HaMitah one must complete the three words, the Sha'ar HaKollel12 writes, analyzing the wording of the Alter Rebbe, who wrote "Shema Yisrael until the end of all three parshiyos": 'Seemingly it would have sufficed to write "and he reads Krias Shema". And one can say that this is because our minhag is to be careful also in the beis haknesses to daven Maariv specifically after tzeis hakochavim, and we fulfill the obligation of Krias Shema according to all opinions, while Krias Shema al HaMitah is for the sake of protection. And the wording of the Gemara13 is: "One who enters to sleep on his bed says Shema Yisrael until VeHayah Im Shamoa", and so the Beis Yosef ruled in the Shulchan Aruch, that he should say only the parsha of Shema. Except that the poskim decided, based on the Midrash, to read all three parshiyos, which contain 248 words, to protect his 248 limbs from the mazikin. Therefore he needed to specify "Shema Yisrael" (in the wording of the Gemara) "until the end of all three parshiyos" (so that all 248 words should be from Krias Shema itself), for some wrote that to complete the 248 words of Krias Shema al HaMitah one should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" (Machatzis HaShekel), or repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes" (as with the shliach tzibbur in the Shulchan Aruch, siman 61), and these two pieces of advice are also found in the gloss of the Tzemach in Pri Etz Chaim, Sha'ar Krias Shema al HaMitah, ch. 2. But the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur ruled above, regarding the Krias Shema of Yotzer, that the individual should repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", to be concerned for those who hold that words which are not from the three parshiyos of Krias Shema do not complete the 248 words of Krias Shema. And if so, all the more so in Krias Shema al HaMitah these two pieces of advice are not applicable. For "Kel Melech Ne'eman", which is before Krias Shema, is in place of the "Amen" after the brochos before Krias Shema; and also after Krias Shema there is no Emes VeYatziv or Emes VeEmunah at all. And if so, it is clear that in Krias Shema al HaMitah he should repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem". And this is what the Alter Rebbe wrote: "Shema Yisrael" (that he should not begin from "Kel Melech Ne'eman") "until the end of all three parshiyos" (and he should not add the word "Emes")'.
And the Rebbe writes14: 'And regarding completing the 248 words in Krias Shema al HaMitah, I have not heard explicitly; but it seems to me that Anash conduct themselves as written in the Sha'ar HaKollel on the Siddur, ch. 36, se'if katan 4, to repeat the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem"'.
> Thus we have seen that the poskim held that in the tefillah of Maariv too one must complete the 248 words, and they wrote several ways how to do this; and according to our minhag, one should complete it as in the completion of the tefillah of Shacharis, by repeating the words "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", and so is the practice in Krias Shema al HaMitah.
Notes:
1 Parshas Ki Savo ↩
2 Tehillim 31:6 ↩
3 Sod HaShema. Also brought in Seder HaYom, Kavanas Krias Shema VeHaYichud ↩
4 Sha'ar Mincha U'Maariv, ch. 6 ↩
5 Ma'amar Em Kol Chai, part 1, siman 17 ↩
6 Siman 88 ↩
7 Orach Chaim, siman 61, se'if katan 4 ↩
8 There, se'if katan 6 ↩
9 However, see further on in his words, where he writes that seemingly there is another remedy, which the Mateh Moshe wrote ↩
10 There, se'if katan 3 ↩
11 There, se'if katan 17 ↩
12 Ch. 36, se'if katan 4 ↩
13 Brochos 60b ↩
14 Igros Kodesh, vol. 16, p. 294 ↩
[9] (Halacha 1125)
The 248 Words - Women
Question: Must women also complete the 248 words?
Answer: This question was asked of the holy Rav, author of the Minchas Elazar1, of Munkatch: 'That which he asked: whether a woman should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" in Krias Shema, since it is only in order to complete the 248 words corresponding to the limbs of a person, while a woman has 252 limbs — as the Magen Avraham writes in siman 610, se'if katan 3, regarding a woman, that she need not make a Yom Kippur candle, because the number does not apply to her limbs, which are 252, see there; and since, regardless, the Magen Avraham writes in siman 61 in the name of the Maharshal that one should not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", so as not to interrupt in the bracha of Krias Shema — therefore, regarding a woman, one can certainly say that she should not interrupt, since the number does not apply to her — end of the gist of his words'.
And he answered regarding this: 'Now, since the source of the law and of the matter that there must be 248 words in Krias Shema is only from the holy Zohar and the Tikkunim, as written at length in the Beis Yosef, siman 61, there — therefore I hereby write in response some of the words of Kabbalah, even though "לא בינת אדם לי" ("I do not have the understanding of a man") to decide and clarify in "סוד ה' ליריאיו" ("the secret of Hashem is with those who fear Him"); nevertheless, since the foundation of the law in this is only in the holy Zohar, therefore truly we must come to its pure source by way of truth. Now, the Arizal wrote in Sha'ar HaKavanos and in the Siddur that the reason of the secret of the 248 words in Krias Shema is that now, in Krias Shema, Z"A grows and complete 248 limbs are made for him etc.; therefore one must double the three words ("Hashem Elokeichem Emes") twice, so that through them all 248 limbs of Zeir Anpin will be completed — end of the gist of his holy words, as relevant to our matter. And now it is quite correct that also a woman, if she says Krias Shema (even though she is not obligated, and she brings herself into obligation), in any case necessarily acts (unspecified intent being as if specified) for that kavanah of the Zohar and Tikkunim, to rectify the 248 limbs above of Z"A (who is male, in the aspect of 248 limbs, as it were); and so indeed a woman too must say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" or double "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", and there is no distinction at all. And since we have come to this, that what is written in the Beis Yosef in the name of the Zohar, to rectify the 248 limbs, does not refer to those of the person, each one himself' .. [And see the responsa of the Radbaz (brought in Limudim BeSimchas HaRegel of the Chida zt"l), where he discusses the reason that chametz is forbidden in the slightest amount, more than other prohibitions of kares, and writes at the end that one must necessarily say it is only because of the allusion that our Sages z"l said, that chametz alludes to the yetzer hara etc., see there. All the more so we, in our case, where the entire source of this law is only from the holy Zohar and the Tikkunim — here we certainly need the words of Kabbalah from Rabbeinu the Ari HaChai, by whose light light is seen in the words of the holy Zohar in all places]'2.
> Thus, according to his words, a woman must complete the 248 words, since this is in order to complete the 248 limbs above of Zeir Anpin [and it should be added that regarding what the questioner wrote, that there is a concern of interruption — according to our minhag, in which we do not say "Kel Melech Ne'eman" but rather double "Ani Hashem Elokeichem", the concern does not exist].
In the Ohr HaHalacha (Davidovitch)3 he writes: 'Therefore I thought to say, as a possibility, that wherever it says "248 limbs", the intent is not to those limbs taught in Ohalos regarding tumah, that is, limbs that have bones, but rather the intent is to the principal limbs of a person, even those that have no bones, such as the heart, the ears, the eyes, etc. And possibly in this there is no distinction between a man and a woman, and both have 248 such limbs; and accordingly it is well understood that regarding Krias Shema they did not distinguish between a woman and a man, for in both, the Zeir Anpin of the principal limbs is rectified through Krias Shema; and likewise, according to the Zohar, the principal limbs are healed through Krias Shema, and in this there is no practical difference between a man and a woman; and likewise regarding Yom Kippur'.
And based on this he writes in the Biurim4: 'And even women, who have more than 248 limbs, as explained in Bechoros — nevertheless one can say that it refers to the 248 principal limbs of a person, and in this there is no distinction between a man and a woman, and their women are healed through Krias Shema; therefore even women can complete it and say "Kel Melech Ne'eman", and it is not an interruption'.
[And note the words of the Chida in Devash LePi5: '"Sotah" — Rabbeinu the Baal HaTurim wrote: "HaMe'arerim" has the numerical value of twice 248, to say that they examine the 248 of the man and of the woman — end of his words. And one must understand this, for those of a woman are 252. And possibly it is because we say in Bechoros, daf 45, that the extra limbs in a woman do not convey tumah in an ohel, as it says "זאת התורה אדם כי ימות באהל" ("This is the law: when a man dies in a tent") — something that is equal for every person. If so, the principal limbs of the woman are 248, and therefore the pasuk equated the woman to the man, 248 for each one, for the extra ones are not significant and do not convey tumah in an ohel, only the 248'].
In the Yalkut Yosef6 he writes: 'A woman must conclude after Krias Shema "Ani Hashem Elokeichem, Emes", and repeat "Hashem Elokeichem Emes". And it is good that she also say before Krias Shema "Kel Melech Ne'eman"'.
And in a note he writes: 'And if it is because of the concern of interruption in saying "Kel Melech Ne'eman" before Krias Shema — for us, a woman does not recite the brochos of Krias Shema, since they have a fixed time, and women are exempt from mitzvos that have a fixed time; and accordingly there is no interruption in this. And even though regardless a woman is not obligated in the mitzvah of Krias Shema, because it is a time-bound mitzvah, nevertheless, when she brings herself into this obligation before the tefillah [in order to accept the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven], it is fitting for her to say Krias Shema with the count of words corresponding to her limbs .. And now, when we come to count, we have in Krias Shema 245 letters; and when we say "Hashem Elokeichem Emes", that makes 248; and we double "Emes", that makes 249; and she adds to this "Kel Melech Ne'eman", that makes 252 words. And this corresponds to the 252 limbs in a woman'.
> Thus, in practice, several of the poskim wrote that a woman who says Krias Shema should also complete the three words to 248.
--------------
Notes:
1 Vol. 2, siman 28 (and in Darkei Chaim VeShalom, os 143) ↩
2 However, in the Ohr HaHalacha (Davidovitch), siman 61, in the Chiddushim, os 2, he writes: 'And I, in my poverty, did not merit to understand his words. For it is true that according to the reason of the Arizal, certainly a woman too should say "Kel Melech Ne'eman"; however, in any case, a verse does not depart from its plain meaning, and in its plain sense the reason is as the Beis Yosef brought in the name of the Midrash HaNe'elam, which expounded on the pasuk "רפאות תהי לשרך" etc. (Mishlei 3:8): that Rabbi Nehorai said in the name of Rabbi Nechemiah: In Krias Shema there are 248 words, like the number of a person's limbs, and one who reads Krias Shema properly — each and every limb takes one word and is healed by it; and this is "רפאות תהי לשרך" ("It shall be healing to your body") — end quote. And see further there in the Beis Yosef, who elaborates on this. And this reason does not apply to a woman, since her limbs are more numerous; and if so, how is it possible to permit a woman to interrupt between Ahavah Rabbah and Krias Shema on the basis of a reason that is according to sod' ↩
3 Cited in the previous note ↩
4 Os 3 ↩
5 Ma'areches Samech, os 1 ↩
6 Pesukei DeZimrah and Krias Shema, siman 61, se'if 18; and in She'eris Yosef, vol. 2, p. 186 ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group