Tachanun
[1] (Halacha 143)
Presented in honor of Yud Kislev, the Chag HaGeulah of the Mitteler Rebbe.
Question: Regarding Yud Kislev it is written in Sefer HaMinhagim1 'Tachanun is not said, and also not at the Mincha before it, Tes Kislev' - how is it possible to omit the recitation of Tachanun, which is part of the tefillah?
Answer: The Tur wrote in siman 131: 'And Rabbi Netronai wrote that nefilas apayim, that the tzibbur fall on their faces after the tefillah, is optional'. And the Darkei Moshe wrote2, that therefore all the laws of Tachanun depend on minhag.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe3: 'After the shliach tzibbur has finished the repetition of the tefillah, they fall on their faces and offer supplications, each place according to its minhag; and moreover, the essence of nefilas apayim is a minhag that all of Yisroel have practiced from time immemorial, and even so it is not an obligation but optional, therefore all its halachos depend on minhag'.
If so, the character of Tachanun is that it is optional, and therefore we find a multitude of minhogim among the Jewish people regarding the recitation of Tachanun. And this is the reason that we do not say Tachanun at a time of simcha and festivity, such as Yud Kislev, the Chag HaGeulah of the Mitteler Rebbe, on which a very great stage began in the spreading of the teachings of Chassidus4.
Question: A chassid who davens in a minyan in which Tachanun is said - what should he do?
Answer: The poskim wrote5 that since nowadays there are already many communities conducting themselves with different minhogim in the same city, there is therefore no concern of לא תתגודדו, and therefore he should follow our minhag and not say Tachanun, but he should endeavor to do so in a manner that is not conspicuous; and in the words of the Rebbe6 regarding a similar case: 'It is understood that conspicuous conduct is, in the vast majority of cases, undesirable'.
However, the recitation of the 13 middos he should say together with the tzibbur7.
Question : A person who is in the year of mourning, r"l, and he davens as shliach tzibbur in a shul in which Tachanun is said on such a day - what should he do?
Answer: Ideally, if it is within his ability to explain to them the great virtue of the day and thereby to bring about, in pleasant ways and with full agreement, that Tachanun not be said - how good. But if it is not possible to act in this way, and it is important to the tzibbur that as chazzan he conduct himself according to the minhag of the shul, he must say Tachanun with the tzibbur.
And we will conclude with a letter of the Rebbe8: 'In reply to his letter, in which he writes regarding the question of the nusachos, since at times he is required to go down before the amud in a shul where they daven not in Nusach Ari.
And behold, in matters such as these, quite frequently, when one does not make a discussion of it and conducts oneself simply, it does go through smoothly and in peace; and certainly, many times, also in his case, when he will not raise questions about it beforehand, they will not even notice the change of nusach. And it is also understood that to make a machlokes over this is not worthwhile, for his gain will be offset by his loss, and particularly with regard to tefillah b'tzibbur, concerning which it is said פדה בשלום נפשי ("He redeemed my soul in peace")…'.
Gut Yom Tov
Notes:
1 p. 16 and p. 90 ↩
2 ibid. s"k 5 ↩
3 siman 131 se'if 1 ↩
4 See the maamar Atah Echad 5742 (Sefer HaMaamarim Melukat vol. 1 p. 416) se'if 7 ↩
5 See the sources cited in Piskei Teshuvos siman 131 os 8 note 43. Nesivim BiSdeh HaShlichus vol. 1 p. 35 os 13 ↩
6 Igros Kodesh vol. 15 p. 58 (letter 5376) ↩
7 Shu"t Igros Moshe OC vol. 3 siman 89. Tefillah K'Hilchasah ch. 15 os 12. Nesivim BiSdeh HaShlichus ibid. p. 36 os 15 ↩
8 Igros Kodesh vol. 10 p. 207 (letter 3174) ↩
[2] (Halacha 144)
The Alter Rebbe wrote in the Siddur: 'After Shemoneh Esrei at Shacharis and at Mincha one says Viduy'.
Question: Why, immediately after Shemoneh Esrei, do we say Viduy before the 13 middos and nefilas apayim?
Answer: Placing the Viduy before nefilas apayim is founded upon the words of the Zohar1: 'בתר דסיים קאים על רגלוי לאודאה על חובוי, בגין דלא יהא פטרא דפומא לסטרא אחרא לאסטאה ליה, ואתכפייא קמיה, ויקום בקיומיה לאתברכא מבי מלכא' [and after he has finished the tefillas ha'amidah he should stand on his feet to confess his sins, so that there be no opening of the mouth for the sitra achra to accuse and prosecute against him on account of his sins, and thereby the prosecutor is subdued before him, and he himself stands firm to be blessed from the house of the King, to receive the influence (of the 13 middos of rachamim)], and in the writings of the Arizal2 it is explained that the purpose of the Viduy is to fulfill that which is stated, 'ונשא השעיר עליו את כל עונותם' ("And the goat shall bear upon it all their sins"), for through the Viduy one gives the prosecutor - the ס"מ - his portion, so that he will go and not interfere with the union of the Holy One Blessed be He with Yisroel [the union of Yaakov and Leah in the recitation of the 13 middos of rachamim, and the union of Yaakov and Rochel in nefilas apayim].
Regarding the teshuvah contained in the Viduy, the Rebbe writes: a) 'And the explanation is that the Torah and the mitzvos are without limit and without end, since their source is in Hashem, who is Ein Sof; therefore there is no limit to the measure of advancement and ascent in all matters of good and holiness in day-to-day life in accordance with the will of the Creator. And even if you were to say that the situation in this regard yesterday was all that was required relative to his level, the situation today must be loftier, and tomorrow loftier still. And this is the reason that Tachanun is said on every weekday - a request for forgiveness from Hashem, abundant in forgiveness, over the fact that today (and yesterday) the fulfillment of the will of the Creator was not in a loftier manner'3.
b) 'That the Holy One Blessed be He, in His unlimited kindness, makes it possible to say Tachanun, to do teshuvah'4.
c) And likewise, even the recitation of Tachanun .. brings to joy in one who serves Hashem, when he contemplates the greatness of the kindness of Hashem, may He be blessed, who grants a person the ability to rectify the past'5.
Question: A person who needs to make an interruption before the conclusion of the tefillah - may he interrupt immediately upon concluding Shemoneh Esrei, or only after the recitation of Tachanun and nefilas apayim?
Answer: The Alter Rebbe wrote6: 'And this supplication that one offers in nefilas apayim must be said immediately after the tefillah; but if he interrupted and occupied himself with other matters after the tefillah, his supplication is no longer heard as much. Therefore one should not speak between the tefillah and nefilas apayim (even though by strict law there is no prohibition in the matter, since the essence of nefilas apayim is optional). Nevertheless, one need only be careful not to interrupt and occupy oneself with other matters entirely, but a brief conversation is not a concern; and so long as one does not interrupt with other matters entirely, he may go after the tefillah to another place to fall on his face there. [And in siman 1117 he wrote: 'There is no prohibition at all to interrupt (with matters of the tefillah and its needs) between the silent tefillah and the tefillah said aloud (but to occupy oneself with other matters is forbidden until after nefilas apayim, as will be explained in siman 131)'].
If so, we have seen that in order for a person's supplication to be heard, he must place nefilas apayim as close as possible to Shemoneh Esrei, and therefore one should not interrupt between them.
Notes:
1 vol. 2, 262b ↩
2 Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar HaSelichos, and in the Siddur of the Arizal ↩
3 Igros Kodesh vol. 28, letter of erev Shabbos Kodesh parshas Yisro 5733 ↩
4 Heichal Menachem vol. 1 p. 46 ↩
5 Igros Kodesh vol. 14 p. 48 ↩
6 siman 131 se'if 1 ↩
7 se'if 3 ↩
[3] (Halacha 145)
Question: There are chassidic communities that do not say Tachanun on the days of the histalkus of the talmidim of the Baal Shem Tov throughout the generations; what is the Chabad minhag and why?
Answer: a. Now, regarding this minhag, the Rav, the tzaddik, author of the Minchas Elazar of Munkatch, wrote1: 'And it is a minhag of foolishness and frivolity, for if so they would never say Tachanun, since there is no single day on which there does not perforce fall the yahrtzeit of many geonim and holy ones and our known Rebbes, and of those who are not known - these being the nevi'im, tannaim and amoraim, and all the chachomim and tzaddikim of all the generations, in their thousands and tens of thousands, and their yahrtzeit falls on every one of the aforementioned days. It emerges that Tachanun would be nullified entirely, and that this entire siman (131) would, chas v'shalom, be missing from the Shulchan Aruch. Rather, it is certain that this is not so, and on a yahrtzeit one must not omit Tachanun at all'.
And he repeated it a second time in Divrei Torah2: 'And also as for those who do not say Tachanun on the day of the yahrtzeit of a tzaddik - it is certainly a complete error, for there is no day in the whole year on which there do not fall many yahrtzeits of geonim and holy ones of the Most High, and also of the company of the nevi'im and tannaim and amoraim zy"a; and it emerges that you cast aspersion upon the earlier ones, upon all the tzaddikim who say Tachanun on every day that is their yoma d'hilula'.
b. However, in the sefer Mishmeres Shalom by the Rav, the tzaddik, of Koidanov3 this minhag is defended with regard to chassidim who conduct themselves so in respect of their own Rebbe, in whose shadow they merited to shelter; and he brought a source for this minhag from the Gemara in Yevamos4, that the day of the histalkus of a tzaddik is called a 'regel', and therefore Tachanun is not to be said. [And note what is brought regarding the Rebbe Rashab5: 'It was evident with the Rebbe n"e that it was pleasing to him when they did not say Tachanun on a yahrtzeit, as on Lag BaOmer and the like'].
c. However, in practice our minhag follows the words of the Tzemach Tzedek, and so the Rebbe Rayatz directed in practice - to be particular to say Tachanun on such meritorious days, as is stated explicitly in many sichos and letters of the Rebbe, as follows: in a letter in Igros Kodesh6: 'And similar to what I once heard from my father-in-law the Rebbe זצוקללה"ה נבג"מ zy"a regarding the day of a yahrtzeit, that our minhag is to say Tachanun - that the Tzemach Tzedek said: When is there yet such a time to plead and obtain'. [When else is there such a time (auspicious) to ask and to accomplish].
And in another letter7: 'Regarding what he asked me some time ago, whether it is our practice to say Tachanun on the day of the histalkus of tzaddikim. Now, it is surely known to him that on Yud Shvat too we say Tachanun; and once I asked my father-in-law the Rebbe, and he answered me: When is there yet such a good time to plead and obtain as on these days'.
And in the sicha of 20 Menachem Av 57108: 'I once asked my father-in-law the Rebbe what the reason is that among Chabad chassidim it is the practice to say Tachanun on the yahrtzeit of tzaddikim (unlike in Poland), and he answered that this is the most opportune time to ask and to accomplish, etc. And one may say that the explanation of this is - that among those of Poland they do not say Tachanun, because the ascent on the day of the yahrtzeit by the tzaddik, of whom it is said "באמונתו יְחַי'", effects an ascent for all who are bound to him, so that they find themselves in a standing and state above the matters over which one must say Tachanun (even though this is not in a manner of pnimiyus); but Chabad chassidim, of whom pnimiyus and avodah specifically are demanded, wish to elevate the body as well, a cleansed body ('a washed body'), and therefore they say Tachanun then as well'.
Question: When someone davens in a minyan in which Tachanun is not said, contrary to the Chabad minhag, what must he do?
Answer: The poskim wrote that since nowadays there are many communities conducting themselves with different minhogim in the same city, there is therefore no concern of לא תתגודדו, and therefore he should follow our minhag and say Tachanun, but he should endeavor to do so in a manner that is not conspicuous; and in the words of the Rebbe9: 'And as to his second question [this is what the questioner asked: when one davens in a shul where they do not say Tachanun on days of hilula, contrary to our minhag, should he say Tachanun (which is sometimes bound up with conspicuousness and disputes), or should he not be separate from the tzibbur and not say Tachanun?] - it is understood that conspicuous conduct is, in the vast majority of cases, undesirable'10.
Notes:
1 Nimukei Orach Chaim siman 131 ↩
2 vol. 3 os 46 ↩
3 siman 12 os 4 ↩
4 122a, and in Rashi there ↩
5 Sefer HaSichos 5693 p. 126 ↩
6 vol. 19 p. 214 ↩
7 Igros Kodesh vol. 7 p. 311 ↩
8 Likkutei Sichos vol. 11 p. 210 (free translation) ↩
9 Igros Kodesh vol. 15 p. 58 ↩
10 And see the discussion in understanding this response in Beirurei Minhagim - Seder HaYom (Friedman) p. 139. Nesivim BiSdeh HaShlichus vol. 1 p. 35. Hiskashrus issue 5750 ↩
[4] (Halacha 146)
Question: One who davens the tefillah of Mincha in a minyan in which they do not say Tachanun but say Aleinu L'Shabeach immediately, or a person who finished the Shemoneh Esrei of Shacharis while the tzibbur is already at Aleinu L'Shabeach - should he say Tachanun according to the order of his own tefillah, or should he say Aleinu L'Shabeach together with them and afterwards Tachanun?
Answer: The Gemara in Bava Metzia1 relates the incident of the oven of Achnai, in which Rabbi Eliezer differed with his colleagues, in that he ruled the oven tahor and they ruled it tamei; and since he did not accept the ruling of his colleagues, the Nasi Rabban Gamliel placed him under niddui. From that time onward Imma Shalom - the sister of Rabban Gamliel, who was married to Rabbi Eliezer - did not allow her husband to fall on his face in 'nefilas apayim', so that he should not offer supplication, and through his displeasure harm would befall Rabban Gamliel. One time she did not manage to watch, and he fell nefilas apayim; when she noticed this she said to her husband: Arise, you have surely already killed Rabban Gamliel my brother. And at precisely that time the sound of a shofar went out from the house of the Nasi, announcing that Rabban Gamliel had died.
And the Ritva wrote there2: 'It is a wondrous thing, how is it possible that she (the wife of Rabbi Eliezer) would not move from him the entire day (to make sure that he does not fall on his face); and from here our teacher brings a proof that it is forbidden to interrupt with conversation and with other matters that are not of the tefillah between the tefillah and nefilas apayim'. (That is to say, if one makes an interruption between Shemoneh Esrei and nefilas apayim, nefilas apayim no longer has that same effect, and therefore she did not need to watch over him the entire day, but only to make sure that he would make an interruption between the tefillah and nefilas apayim).
On this basis the Alter Rebbe wrote3: 'And this supplication that one offers in nefilas apayim must be said immediately after the tefillah; but if he interrupted and occupied himself with other matters after the tefillah - his supplication is no longer heard as much. Therefore one should not speak between the tefillah and nefilas apayim (even though by strict law there is no prohibition in the matter, since the essence of nefilas apayim is optional). Nevertheless, one need only be careful not to interrupt and occupy oneself with other matters entirely, but a brief conversation is not a concern. And so long as one does not interrupt with other matters entirely - he may go after the tefillah to another place to fall on his face there'.
And in Hilchos Tefillah he wrote4: 'And there is no prohibition at all to interrupt (with matters of the tefillah and its needs) between the silent tefillah and the tefillah said aloud (but to occupy oneself with other matters is forbidden until after nefilas apayim, as will be explained in siman 131)'.
It emerges from the words of the Alter Rebbe: 1. From the standpoint of the essential law of the laws of interruption, there is no prohibition to interrupt between Shemoneh Esrei and nefilas apayim; 2. but since one who interrupts causes his supplication not to be heard as much, it is therefore forbidden to interrupt; 3. however, the prohibition is specifically when he interrupts with other matters entirely; 4. and even other matters, insofar as it is a brief conversation, present no problem.
And as to the definition of 'other matters entirely' - this means other things that are not connected at all to the tefillah; but matters connected to the tefillah present no problem at all, as is precise in the language of the Ritva: 'and with other matters that are not of the tefillah'.
Now, regarding the recitation of Aleinu L'Shabeach, the great importance of saying it together with the tzibbur is well known, and in the holy words of the Rebbe5: 'And he should also join and say it when the tzibbur says it'6, [and this will be explained, with the help of Hashem, in another halacha].
And in addition, Aleinu L'Shabeach is considered part of the stages of the tefillah, as is explained in the Shulchan Aruch7 and in the writings of the Arizal8, and consequently it is not considered an interruption that detracts with regard to nefilas apayim.
Therefore, in practice he should say Aleinu L'Shabeach together with the tzibbur and afterwards say the Tachanun9.
Notes:
1 59b ↩
2 s.v. 'Lo' ↩
3 siman 131 se'if 1 ↩
4 siman 111 se'if 3 ↩
5 Shulchan Menachem vol. 1 p. 272 ↩
6 Machatzis HaShekel siman 65 s"k 3 ↩
7 siman 132 se'if 2 in the hagahah ↩
8 Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar Krias Sefer Torah ch. 6 ↩
9 And so it is ruled in practice in Halichos Shlomo ch. 11, in Dvar Halacha 3. And see at length in Rivevos Efraim vol. 5 siman 101, which brings a give-and-take on this matter. And on the other hand see Shu"t Kaneh Bosem vol. 2, siman 8. And Shu"t Asra D'Rav, teshuvah no. 6612, and sources cited there ↩
[5] (Halacha 148)
Question: From when is Tachanun not said on Friday - erev Shabbos Kodesh, and why?
Answer: a. The Rambam wrote1: 'It is a widespread minhag among all of Yisroel that there is no nefilas apayim on Shabbosos .. nor at the Mincha of the eves of Shabbosos and Yomim Tovim'. And so it is ruled in the Shulchan Aruch2, and so too wrote the Alter Rebbe3: 'It is the practice not to fall on their faces after the tefillah of Mincha on erev Shabbos'.
And the Pri Megadim wrote4: 'And it appears that the same law applies to mincha gedolah after chatzos, that they likewise do not fall on their faces. And the same law applies to one who eats bread after chatzos, that he should not say Al Naharos Bavel, but rather Shir HaMaalos'.
If so, we see from his words that Tachanun is not said on erev Shabbos already *from chatzos of the day, and therefore in bentching too, from chatzos, one says Shir HaMaalos.
b. As to the reason for the matter, they wrote that already from chatzos the holiness of Shabbos begins to shine; and see in the Magen Avraham5 that the following day has already taken effect. And so too wrote the Shelah6: 'And from chatzos onward all of one's occupation should be in the holiness of Shabbos, which is entirely Shabbos - that is, in an arousal of teshuvah, and in rectifying one's deeds, and in the study of Torah. So too should all the members of his household do until the time of candle lighting; and your sign is 'ל"א תעשה כל מלאכה', for with the beginning of holiness from chatzos onward, and with the addition of an hour at the conclusion of Shabbos, since one must add from the holy to the profane - behold, these are 31 hours'.
And so wrote the Rebbe7: 'The time of erev Shabbos (and Yom Tov) after chatzos, when it is forbidden to say Tachanun, is brought about because the holiness of Shabbos and Yom Tov already shines then in a manner that precludes the matter of saying Tachanun'.
*Question: As is known, the time for the tefillah of Shacharis is, b'dieved, until chatzos8; a person who finished the Shemoneh Esrei of Shacharis and chatzos arrived - should he say Tachanun?
Answer: Now, according to the words of the Rebbe, that after chatzos is a time that precludes the saying of Tachanun; and so too it is written in Shu"t Az Nidberu9: on the basis of the aforementioned Pri Megadim, that the saying of Tachanun applies only until chatzos. Therefore in such a case he should not say Tachanun.
*Question: Our minhag10 is to strike the heart during Shemoneh Esrei at the recitation of Selach Lanu Ki Chatanu.. In the aforementioned case, when he knows that at the conclusion of his Shemoneh Esrei he will not say Tachanun, must he strike the heart?
Answer: The Rebbe writes11 regarding a similar question [one who davens Mincha close to nightfall in a manner that he will not be able to say Tachanun12, should he strike during Shemoneh Esrei]: 'As to what he wrote in his question regarding the recitation of Selach Lanu - although I have not heard anything on this, yet from the matter itself it appears that it depends only on the time of the recitation of Selach Lanu, not on what will be afterwards'.
If so, since Shemoneh Esrei is before chatzos, he should strike at Selach Lanu even though afterwards he will not say Tachanun.
Notes:
1 Hilchos Tefillah ch. 5 halacha 15 ↩
2 OC siman 267 se'if 1 ↩
3 OC siman 267 se'if 1 ↩
4 Mishbetzos Zahav siman 267 s"k 1 ↩
5 siman 292 s"k 4 ↩
6 Maseches Shabbos, Perek Ner Mitzvah ↩
7 In Likkutei Sichos vol. 28 p. 19, in free translation ↩
8 Shulchan Aruch HaRav siman 89 se'ifim 1 - 2 ↩
9 vol. 11 siman 1 ↩
10 Sefer HaMinhagim p. 11 ↩
11 Igros Kodesh vol. 20 p. 157 ↩
12 As explained in Shulchan Aruch HaRav siman 131 se'if 4. And see in the sefer Beirurei Minhagim (Friedman), Seder HaYom V'HaLaylah p. 196 onward and note 20 ↩
[6] (Halacha 149)
Question: Is nefilas apayim done in a place where there is no sefer Torah?
Answer: The Rokeach wrote1: 'And one falls only before a sefer Torah, and the sign is that it is written concerning the war of Ai ויפול על פניו ארצה לפני ארון ה' ("and he fell upon his face to the ground before the Aron of Hashem")'. And so ruled the Rema2.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch3: 'There are those who have the minhag that nefilas apayim is done only in a place where there is a sefer Torah, and the sign for the matter is from the war of Ai, ויפול על פניו לפני ארון ה' ("and he fell upon his face before the Aron of Hashem"), and in a place where there is no sefer Torah the minhag is to say the techinah without covering the face. .. Even an individual who davens in his home, when he davens at the time that the tzibbur is davening in shul, may fall together with them at the time that they fall, for he is as though he were standing with them, since even an iron partition does not divide between Yisroel and their Father in Heaven, so long as there are ten in one place, as is explained in siman 55'.
And there4 he wrote: 'But if there were ten in one place and they are saying Kaddish or Kedushah, whoever hears their voice may answer together with them, even if he is in an entirely different house, and even if several houses separate between them, since even an iron partition does not divide between Yisroel and their Father in Heaven. And there are those who say that nevertheless there must not be filth or avodah zarah — which is considered like excrement in this regard — separating between them, and one should be concerned for their words'.
If so, one who davens in a house in which there is no sefer Torah may do nefilas apayim at the time that the tzibbur in shul is saying nefilas apayim, but this must be near the shul, for otherwise it is possible that between him and the shul there is excrement or avodah zarah, in which case we are concerned that there is no joining and nefilas apayim is not done.
There are poskim who wrote5 that nefilas apayim with the tzibbur is specifically when he hears the tefillah of the tzibbur (such as when he lives adjacent to the shul), and not merely when he times it to the moment at which they fall.
Therefore an individual in his home who is distant from the shul generally cannot fall upon his face even if he knows the time at which they fall in shul, since he does not hear them.
It is related that the Rebbe6, on Thursday, 27 Mar-Cheshvan 5717, on his return from the Ohel, because of the late hour stopped to daven Mincha in the 'Ezra' printing house of Rabbi Mordechai Shusterman (a place without a sefer Torah), and davened Mincha with Tachanun but without nefilas apayim (and this testimony, which was written close to the time of the event, is more precise than what was said orally over the years, and this is readily understood).
[According to this view, the reason that Rabbi Eliezer did nefilas apayim7, even though simply understood it was in his home, is that presumably he had a sefer Torah in his home8, or that he timed it to the hour at which the tzibbur davens9, or because one who knows how to direct all that is needed through the power of his thought is considered as a place of a sefer Torah10. And especially Rabbi Eliezer the Great, who before his passing testified concerning himself: 'Woe to you, my two arms, which are like two sifrei Torah that are being rolled up', etc. And in Sanhedrin11: 'Our Rabbis taught: When R' Eliezer fell ill etc., they said to him: Is it possible that a sefer Torah is in distress and we should not weep?' And at the end of Maseches Sotah: 'When R' Eliezer died, the sefer Torah was hidden away'].
Notes:
1 Hilchos Tefillah siman 324 ↩
2 OC siman 131 se'if 2 in the hagahah ↩
3 Siman 131 se'if 3 ↩
4 Siman 55 se'if 22 ↩
5 Levush se'if 2, Magen Avraham s"k 8, Eliyah Rabbah s"k 7. And so it is implied from the Agur 168. And see also Shulchan Aruch HaRav, the RA"A edition, os 54 ↩
6 The diary of HaRIL"G, printed in Sefer HaMazkir p. 105 ↩
7 See Halacha no. 146 ↩
8 Magen Avraham s"k 6, Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav s"k 5. Levushei Serad os 4 ↩
9 Ateres Zekeinim os 2 ↩
10 Yalkut HaGershuni, based on Asarah Ma'amaros ch. 23 ↩
11 101a ↩
[7] (Halacha 724)
Question: Why did they institute to fast and to increase in supplications on Mondays and Thursdays? [1]
Answer: The Behag wrote1: 'And our Rabbis further decreed that they should fast on Monday and on Thursday on account of three things: over the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash, over the Torah that was burned, and over the disgrace of the Name. In the time to come the Holy One, blessed be He, will turn them into gladness, as it is said והפכתי אבלם לששון ("and I shall turn their mourning into gladness")'. And the Mechaber brought it in the Shulchan Aruch2.
And as to the reason that specifically Monday and Thursday were chosen, it is explained in the Midrash Tanchuma3, brought by the Rokeach4: 'And from where did the generations find support that they should fast on Monday and on Thursday? Rather, when Yisroel did that deed, Moshe went up on Thursday and came down on Monday .. therefore the Chachomim instituted that they should fast on Monday and on Thursday, corresponding to Moshe's ascent and his descent'.
And so wrote Tosafos5: 'And if you will say: what is different that they instituted Monday and Thursday? And one may answer: because it is said in the Midrash that Moshe Rabbeinu a"h went up on Thursday to receive the last luchos and came down on Monday, and the Omnipresent was appeased toward him; and since that ascent and descent were a time of favor, they fixed them on Monday and Thursday, and therefore they also had the minhag to fast on Monday and Thursday'.
And indeed in the Midrash and in Tosafos the matter of Monday and Thursday is mentioned with regard to fasts, but other Rishonim mentioned it with regard to the addition in the tefillos and the supplications, as the Manhig wrote6: 'I found in the Midrash: דרשו ה' בהמצאו ("Seek Hashem when He is found") — on Monday and on Thursday you shall find Him, that He is close to you if you seek Him, for the Beis Din above and the Beis Din below are equal .. And the reason for Monday and Thursday over the other days: that Nisan, in which Yisroel went out of Mitzrayim, was on a Thursday, as is stated in Seder Olam Rabbah, and in Shabbos [87b], perek R' Akiva, and the months of the summer, one full and one deficient, and Tishrei on Shabbos, and Yom Kippur on Monday; and Moshe went up on Thursday to receive the last luchos, and came down on Monday, on Yom Kippur, and it was said to him סלחתי כדברך ("I have forgiven as you have spoken"), and therefore a day of pardon and forgiveness was established for the generations. AB"N'7.
And in the Orchos Chaim8 and in the Kol Bo9 they wrote: 'In all the places of Yisroel they had the minhag to increase in tefillah and in supplications on Monday and Thursday, since the Beis Din above and the Beis Din below are equal, and they are days of mercy; therefore they increase on them in tefillah and in supplications, so that those below should compel those above. And there are those who say it is because Moshe Rabbeinu a"h went up on Monday and came down on Thursday when he received the Torah. And a hint from the verse דרשו ה' בהמצאו ("Seek Hashem when He is found"), that is: ב"ה מצאו'.
Now, from the words of these Rishonim it emerges that these days are days of mercy and of favor; but on the other hand we find Rishonim who related to these days as days of judgment, based upon the Gemara in Maseches Shabbos10: 'And Shmuel said: pursa d'dama [= the time for letting blood] is on Sunday, on Wednesday and on erev Shabbos. But Monday and Thursday — no, for the Master said: one who has zechus avos may let blood on Monday and on Thursday, for the Beis Din above and the one below are equal as one'. And Rashi wrote: 'That the Beis Din above and the one below are equal — a person is judged every day, and the batei din sit in the towns on Monday and on Thursday, from the enactment of Ezra onward, and since it is a day of judgment and of accounting, his sins are called to mind'.
And so it is written in the siddur of Rabbeinu Shlomo of Germaiza11: 'On Monday and Thursday, which are days of judgment, as we say: one who has zechus avos may let blood on Monday and Thursday, because the Beis Din above and the one below are equal, and above they are more exacting in judgment; for on Monday and Thursday Ezra instituted the reading of the Torah, and most of the congregation come to hear, therefore the Beis Din below judges on them, while the one above judges every day. And because they are days of judgment they instituted to increase in supplications and to say V'Hu Rachum etc., and also Hashem Elokei Yisroel, which are supplications and requests, and Kel Erech Apayim'.
And in the siddur Otzar HaTefillos12 he wrote in the name of the Siddur HaGadol: 'Chazal instituted Monday and Thursday for saying supplications and confessions, because they are days of judgment; for the order of the seven days of the week follows the order of the seven sefiros: Sunday corresponds to chesed, Monday to the attribute of din, Tuesday to tiferes, Wednesday to netzach, Thursday to hod, which is the thigh of din, Friday to yesod, and the seventh, which is the day of Shabbos, to the Shechinah. It emerges that Monday and Thursday are days of judgment. On the day of Shabbos too there is judgment, except that on Shabbos holiness rests upon it to nullify judgment from it. And blessed be the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, who desires the existence of the world and created teshuvah for them; and when a person confesses before the Holy One, blessed be He, and says "I have sinned", middas hadin has no permission to rule over him, since he himself confesses and admits his sins, his iniquities and his transgressions'.
And in this dispute our Rabbis the Acharonim were likewise divided, for the Rema13 wrote: 'And that which they have the minhag to increase in supplications on Monday and on Thursday is because they are days of favor, and therefore they also have the minhag to fast on them'.
And the Taz explained14: 'Because they are days of favor — for of the forty days of the receiving of the last luchos, which were days of favor, Moshe Rabbeinu went up on Thursday and came down on Monday'.
But the Maharsha"l15 wrote: 'Indeed, I heard from a certain elder who said that the minhag of individuals not to eat meat and drink wine on Monday and on Thursday is because the Beis Din above sits and judges capital cases; and a sign for the matter is what they said at the end of [perek] Mafnin, that blood is not let on Monday and Thursday except for one who has zechus avos. If so, their minhag is a fine one, that on the night before Monday they eat, for capital cases are not judged at night, even above, but only on the day of judgment itself; and even on the night following Monday they do not eat, because they said16 [regarding monetary cases]17 that once they have begun, they conclude even at night'.
And the Magen Avraham wrote18: 'And it appears from his words that he holds that the reason they fast on Monday and Thursday is because they are days of judgment; and this is astonishing, for where is this hinted at? On the contrary, we hold that a person is judged every day, and that on which they fast is because they are days of favor, as is written in siman 134; and so wrote Tosafos and Rashi in Shabbos19 and Tosafos in Kesubos daf 3 .. And it appears to me that one who is unable to fast should at least daven on Monday and Thursday concerning these matters'.
The Pri Chodosh20 too wrote like the Maharsha"l: 'They have the minhag to increase in supplications .. and it is possible to say the opposite, that because they are difficult days they increase in supplications and fast on them'. And so wrote the Mor U'Ketziah21: '.. he should fast specifically on Monday and Thursday because they are certainly days of judgment, for the Beis Din above and the one below are equal, and one must turn them to mercy; therefore Moshe Rabbeinu a"h went up on Thursday to request atonement and forgiveness on behalf of Yisroel, and his tefillah did not return empty, and he came down on Monday sated with favor and full of the blessing of Hashem'.
If so, we have seen that the Rishonim and the Acharonim were divided as to the essential nature of the days of Monday and Thursday: whether they are days of favor or days of judgment22.
Notes:
1 Hilchos Tisha B'Av - siman 18 ↩
2 OC siman 580 se'if 3 ↩
3 (Buber) parshas Vayeira siman 16 ↩
4 Hilchos Taanis siman 209 ↩
5 Bava Kamma 82a s.v. כדי ↩
6 Dinei Tefillah p. 102 ↩
7 The Mekor Chaim (Bacharach) OC siman 580 wrote: 'And Monday is preferable to Thursday, for Moshe Rabbeinu a"h went up on Thursday and came down on Monday, and not as some have written the reverse; and so wrote the Sefer HaManhig, giving a reason for the matter, only that it requires study' ↩
8 Vol. 1, the law of what is added on Monday and Thursday after Shemoneh Esrei, os 1 ↩
9 Siman 18 ↩
10 129b ↩
11 P. 127 ↩
12 Vol. 1 p. 392 ↩
13 OC siman 134 se'if 1 in the hagahah ↩
14 S.k. 1 ↩
15 Yam Shel Shlomo, Chullin ch. 5 siman 11 ↩
16 Sanhedrin 32a ↩
17 And see Magen Avraham siman 580 s"k 9, and Eliyah Rabbah siman 134 s"k 1 ↩
18 That which is in note 17 ↩
19 And see Eliyah Rabbah (that which is in note 17), and the Pri Megadim. And Sfas Emes on Maseches Shabbos there ↩
20 OC siman 134 se'if 1 ↩
21 OC siman 580 ↩
22 The Pri Megadim, Mishbetzos Zahav, siman 134 s"k 1 wrote: 'And see Eliyah Rabbah os 1, that Monday and Thursday, on which the Beis Din above and below are equal to them, are days of judgment. *And behold, it may be said that this is according to the one who says that a person is not judged every day; but according to the one who says that he is judged every day, when there is judgment below there is no judgment above, and they are days of favor'*. But his words require study from what Rashi wrote and from the siddur of Rabbeinu Shlomo of Germaiza. And see also Sfas Emes on Maseches Shabbos there. The Torah Temimah, Shemos ch. 15 note 34, wrote to reconcile them: 'And one must say that both are true, and therefore it is good to fast on them, since it is likely that the requests will be accepted with favor — as the Rishonim wrote, that the days between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are days of favor even though they are also days of judgment; and nevertheless it is not fitting to perform an act such as bloodletting, lest at a time of danger middas hadin should prevail, similar to what is said in Shabbos (32a): a person should always request mercy that he not fall ill, for if he falls ill they say to him, bring merit and be released — see there' ↩
[8] (Halacha 725)
Question: What is the addition that is added to the tefillah on Monday and Thursday? [2]
Answer: It is written in Seder Rav Amram Gaon1: 'And on Monday and on Thursday of the week, when the shliach tzibbur concludes Shemoneh Esrei, the tzibbur begin and say: אם עונינו ענו בנו ה' עשה למען שמך, כי רבו משובותינו, לך חטאנו סלח לנו ("If our iniquities testify against us, Hashem, act for the sake of Your Name, for our backslidings are many, we have sinned against You — forgive us") .. And there are those who say, in place of אם עונינו: ועתה ה' אלהינו אשר הוצאת את עמך מארץ מצרים ביד חזקה ותעש לך שם כיום הזה חטאנו רשענו ("And now, Hashem our G-d, who brought Your people out of the land of Mitzrayim with a mighty hand and made for Yourself a name as of this day, we have sinned, we have acted wickedly") .. אל הוריתנו לומר שלש עשרה etc., as is written above. And there are places that say והוא רחום יכפר עון etc., and ולא כעונותינו גמל עלינו..'.
And the Tur wrote2: 'On Monday and on Thursday they add to say supplications after the shliach tzibbur concludes the repetition of the tefillah; and in Seder Rav Amram it is written that they had the minhag to say אם עונינו ענו בנו and viduy and Va'yaavor. But in all these lands they do not have the minhag to say anything except V'Hu Rachum, as it is written in the siddurim .. And after the supplications they supplicate in nefilas apayim, and before the shliach tzibbur rises there are those who have the minhag to say techinos, in each and every place according to its minhag'.
And the Beis Yosef wrote: 'And now they have the minhag to say the supplications, three times Va'yaavor with one viduy between them, and afterwards they say V'Hu Rachum as it is written in the siddurim'.
And as to the halacha, the Mechaber3 mentioned only that V'Hu Rachum is said; the Rema added as an introduction to his words: 'They have the minhag to increase in supplications on Monday and on Thursday'.
★ ★ ★
Question: Who instituted V'Hu Rachum, and why do we say this nusach?
Answer: It is written in Peirushei Siddur HaTefillah of the Rokeach4: 'We find in the responsa of the Geonim: the institution of V'Hu Rachum, which we read on Thursday and Monday and on Thursday standing, was composed by men of renown who were exiled from Yerushalayim at the time of the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash. Aspasyanus — may his bones be ground — exiled them, and commanded that ships be made for them, and he put them into them without a captain and without any sailor, and drove them out to sea; and a wind rose up against them and cast them onto dry land in each and every district. One ship settled in the country of Leidon, and the second in the country of Arldo, and the third in the country of Bordil. Those who settled in the country of Bordil went out of the ship and settled there, and the officer of the city received them with a cheerful countenance and gave them fields and vineyards; and they were there many days, until that officer died and a new king arose over them, and what the first king had established for them the second overturned, and this one renewed against them evil decrees, so that they had no direction to turn to, for the hand of the oppressor prevailed over them and there was no strength to give birth. And there were there two brothers, Yosef and Binyomin, and their cousin was among them, and Shmuel was his name, and they themselves were of the people of Yerushalayim; and they cried out to Hashem in their distress, and He brought them out of their straits. And they sat in fasts and in taaneisim, and wore sackcloth upon their flesh and sought G-d earnestly, and the three of them composed V'Hu Rachum: Yosef composed from V'Hu Rachum until כי אל מלך חנון ורחום אתה, and Binyomin his brother composed from אנא מלך רחום וחנון until אין כמוך, and Shmuel their cousin composed from אין כמוך until שמע ישראל ה' אלהינו ה' אחד. After the Redeemer of Yisroel saved them and redeemed them from their straits, from a bitter and harsh death, they wrote it down in writing, and on account of that episode they sent to all the places of Yisroel to accept upon themselves to say V'Hu Rachum on Monday and on Thursday; and every kehillah that accepted upon itself to say it on Monday and on Thursday is still accustomed to it and persists in it. And just as the Rock of Yisroel and its Holy One saved them, so may He save us from all our troubles, the G-d who saves'.
And in the siddur of Chassidei Ashkenaz5, from the beis midrash of R' Yehudah HeChassid and of the author of the Rokeach, it is written in a different version: 'V'Hu Rachum — there are those who say that three geonei olam composed it: R' Amitai, and R' Shefatyah, and R' Yosefyah, whom Titus the wicked exiled together with the rest of the exile that was exiled from Yerushalayim, and they lived on for days and years after the destruction. And after some time Titus the wicked perished of evil illnesses, and no king stood for Rome until after several years, as is found in Sefer Yosippon: in the twenty-eighth year after the destruction the world stood without a king; and since the fear of the kingdom had ceased, oppressors arose and renewed evil and strange decrees against Yisroel. And these three pillars of the world arose and composed V'Hu Rachum: one of them composed until אנא מלך, and the second composed from אנא until אין כמוך, and the third composed from אין כמוך until its end. And they wrote letters and sent them throughout the entire exile, to say it with concentration of the heart on the day of the reading of the Torah at the gathering of the people; therefore they had the minhag to write it on parchment scrolls in the manner of Megillas Esther.
ע"א: When Titus the wicked destroyed the Beis HaMikdash, he filled three ships with men and women and placed them there without a captain; and the Holy One, blessed be He, sent a storm wind and cast them onto dry land in three kingdoms. One ship came to the land of Shnuya, and the second to the land of Antzilaya, and the third to the land of Afrikia. And among them were three wise, righteous elders, and the three of them went up from the innermost part of the ship to entreat the king of Afrikia to give them permission to dwell in his land. And the king said to them: from where are you and of which nation are you? They said: we are Jews, and of the seed of Avrohom Avinu. He said to them: if you are of the seed of Avrohom, let your words be tested — if you come out saved from the fire as Avrohom was saved from Ur Kasdim. Take one of you and let him be tested in the fire; if he is saved, I shall fulfil all your requests, and you shall dwell with us and trade in the land. And when they heard this the radiance of their faces changed, and they requested from him a period of three days. He gave them the time and commanded that they be confined in the guardhouse. They stood in tefillah and in supplications, and one of them composed V'Hu Rachum until אנא מלך, and on the second day the second composed from אנא until אין כמוך, and on the third day the third composed from אין כמוך until its end. And when the third day arrived they were asking one another: what did you dream on these three nights? One of them answered and said: on all those three nights I was reading in my dream כי תלך במו אש לא תכווה ("when you walk through fire you shall not be burned"). When they heard this they rejoiced with a great joy, and said to one another: you shall be saved from the fire, and it is good tidings for you that the fire shall not touch you to harm you. They returned before the king, and he cast the master of the dream into his fire, and the Holy One, may His Name be blessed, saved him and he came out whole; and the king settled them in the best of his land, and they increased there very greatly'.
The content of the story is brought in several of the Rishonim: in the Manhig6, and in the Kol Bo7, and the Orchos Chaim8, and others.
And this is the language of the Mahari Abuhav9: 'And behold, V'Hu Rachum was instituted on account of that episode which happened to a ship of Jews from the exile of Yerushalayim, to a place where there was a ruler; and he said to test them in the fiery furnace, that if they are of the seed of Yisroel it should be like Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah. And he gave them a period of thirty days, and every single day they stood in fasting, and whatever they saw in a dream they would tell one another. At the end of the thirty days there was there one of them who was G-d-fearing but was not so learned, and he told them that he had dreamed a certain dream, in which they were reciting to him a certain verse in which there were two occurrences of כי and three of לא. This verse is כי תעבור במים אתך אני וגו' ("When you pass through water I am with you etc."), and the Holy One, blessed be He, performs miracles for us. And immediately they cast them into the fiery furnace, and the fire divided into three parts and did not reach them at all. And concerning this each one of them instituted in the tefillah "rachum", and concluded with "rachum": the first, והוא רחום; the second, אנא מלך רחום וחנון; the third, אין כמוך חנון ורחום.
In this halacha we have seen the source of the tefillah of V'Hu Rachum [which concludes with the words שמע ישראל .. ה' אחד]. And in the coming halacha we shall see some of the remozim and explanations of V'Hu Rachum, in accordance with the nusach of the Alter Rebbe.
Notes:
1 Seder Sheni V'Chamishi ↩
2 OC siman 134 ↩
3 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 134 ↩
4 Os 67 ↩
5 P. 127 ↩
6 Dinei HaTefillah p. 102 ↩
7 Siman 18 ↩
8 Vol. 1, the law of what is added on Monday and Thursday after Shemoneh Esrei, os 1 ↩
9 OC siman 134 ↩
[9] (Halacha 726)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [3]
The Orchos Chaim wrote1: 'And there are in the first verse 13 words, corresponding to the 13 middos and corresponding to the letters of the names of the Avos, which are 13'.
And the Rokeach wrote2: From והוא רחום until כי אל מלך חנון ורחום אתה there are 367 words, corresponding to ה' אלהינו ה' (אחד) — כוז"ו במוכס"ז כוז"ו, which comes to 367; to tell you that whoever says it with concentration of the heart is as though he recites Krias Shema with its letters, and the Holy One accepts his tefillah with mercy — for by א"ת ב"ש the unique Name comes to the numerical value of ברחמים. And there are those who say 365 words, corresponding to the 365 words in the first and second Dibros. Three times עשה למען שמך, corresponding to the three אוהבי שמו in Tehillim'.
And in the writings of the Arizal3 it is written: 'From the chaverim, in the order of V'Hu Rachum: from the beginning until 'כי אל טוב וסלח אתה' there are 312 words, corresponding to the 12 Havayos. From 'אנא מלך' until 'אין כמוך', 130 words, corresponding to the five chassadim, five Havayos. From 'הפותח' until the end, 80 words, the numerical value of yesod; and all of them together are the gematria of 'ראשך (with the kollel) עליך ככרמל', and like the number of the miluim of 72, 63, 45, 52, 161, 151, 143 — and he said that this reckoning requires study. Afterwards the techinah, which is before ה' שארית ישראל פליטת אריאל, has in it 80 words, the numerical value of yesod'.
The Rebbe Rashab4, in a letter to Harav A. D. Lavut, wrote: '(And the nusach of V'Hu Rachum that is added on Monday and Thursday follows the nusach of Sefard, and it is stated in the Pri Etz Chaim and in the Shemoneh She'arim and in the siddur of the Arizal a reason for the number of the words according to Kabbalah. (And according to nusach Ashkenaz there are many more words)'.
And in this vein the Gaon R' Ch. Naeh wrote5: 'And from here it is plainly evident how exacting the Alter Rebbe z"l was that his siddur should be the nusach of the Ari — as its name, so it is; for in the Alter Rebbe's nusach of V'Hu Rachum the number given by the Pri Etz Chaim comes out exactly: from והוא רחום until וסלח אתה there are 312 words, from אנא מלך until תשתחוה 130 words'.
★ ★ ★
The number of words in the siddur of the nusach of the Alter Rebbe in the passage הפותח יד.
We saw above from the writings of the Arizal that there are 80 words; but in the nusach of the siddur of the Alter Rebbe there are only 72 words, as the Rebbe Rashab noted in his aforementioned letter: 'And it requires study, that which the Alter Rebbe omitted the words א-ל הביטה etc., so that 8 words are missing from the count of the 80 words'.
The Gaon R' Ch. Naeh there wrote [before he saw the note of the Rebbe Rashab]: 'But in הפותח יד there are found only 72 words, and it is difficult to say that in the Alter Rebbe's view the Name of 72 is relevant here, contrary to the Pri Etz Chaim; and also the general number must be like the numerical value of 'ראשך'. And what appears to me in this is: behold, in the siddurim of Ashkenaz and Sefard it is written in הפותח יד, after כי אנחנו עמך בני בריתך: 'אל הביטה דל כבודינו בגוים ושקוצנו כטומאת הנדה: עד מתי עזך בשבי (לשבי) ותפארתך ביד צר', עוררה גבורתך etc. .. but in the siddurim of the Alter Rebbe none of this appears; rather, after בני בריתך it begins עוררה גבורתך. And in my youth I heard that these verses are an omission of the censor, and many of Anash have the minhag to say them; and so I saw in the first siddur נה"ש, that in its introduction he wrote dots over ושקוצנו, and concerning the reading עזך בשבי or לשבי; but in the body of the siddur all of this is missing, and he wrote only אל עוררה גבורתך, and from the words הביטה onward it is omitted, and certainly it is from the censor. And behold, I found in a Sefardic siddur printed in Amsterdam, and there it is written אל הביטה דל כבודינו (omitting בגוים) ושקוצנו כטומאת הנדה עוררה גבורתך etc., and the text עד מתי עזך בשבי is not there. And from all this it appears that the true nusach of the Alter Rebbe z"l is to add אל הביטה דל כבודינו בגוים ושקוצנו כטומאת הנדה, which are 8 words, and the number will come out exactly 80 words as the Pri Etz Chaim wrote, and like the nusach of the Sefardic siddur of Amsterdam; and these 8 words are an omission of the censor (and עד מתי עזך בשבי need not be said at all)'.
After some time Rav Naeh saw the aforementioned letter of the Rebbe Rashab, and wrote6: 'Concerning the nusach of V'Hu Rachum: after Kuntres HaSiddur was published, there was received here in the Holy City, may it be built and established, a collection of letters from the Rebbe Moharashab n"e, and in one of the letters, to the Shaar HaKollel, he asks him why the words א' הביטה דל כבודנו etc. were omitted from the nusach of V'Hu Rachum. And behold, in Kuntres HaSiddur I wrote that this is an omission of the censor, and that the nusach should be אל הביטה דל כבודינו בגוים ושקוצנו כטומאת הנדה, עוררה גבורתך etc., amounting to 80 words from הפותח יד until the end, and there I brought proofs for this. And now I have found several more clear proofs for it: .. And behold, in the Pri Etz Chaim it is explicit, from הפותח יד until אחד, 80 words .. And nevertheless, since in the Pri Etz Chaim and in the Mishnas Chassidim it is explicit that there are 80 words until אחד, and it is known that Rabbeinu z"l followed them, therefore one need add only 8 words as above .. And certainly it will be pleasing to the Rebbe Rashab n"e בעד"ק that we have found a way to settle the nusach of Rabbeinu z"l, and may he speak well on our behalf'.
We have seen that the Gaon R' Ch. Naeh wrote that this is an omission of the censorship and not a change made by the Alter Rebbe, and he wrote that one should have the practice to say a further passage of eight words.
However, in the collection Yagdil Torah7 they noted, concerning the words of the Gaon R' Ch. Naeh with regard to the letter of the Rebbe Rashab: 'It appears that he wrote this from memory, when the collection of letters was not in his possession, and with due respect to his honored Torah he altered the matter entirely; and this is the holy language of the Moharashab in his letter: "And it requires study, that which the Alter Rebbe omitted the words אל הביטה etc." It emerges explicitly from his words that his view is clear that this is an omission which Rabbeinu himself made; and it is obvious that the Moharashab did not say the omitted words, and so too those who follow in his footsteps'.
And they further wrote in Yagdil Torah8: that the Rebbe Rashab said to R' Z. Idels, who printed the siddur Tehillas Hashem by his instruction, 'but in any case the אל הביטה is to be omitted'.
And so it is in practice the minhag of Anash, and not like the practice of many of Anash that Rav Naeh mentioned.
If so, according to our minhag the passage הפותח יד comprises 72 words.
Notes:
1 Vol. 1, the law of what is added on Monday and Thursday after Shemoneh Esrei, os 1 ↩
2 In Peirushei Siddur HaTefillah of the Rokeach, os 67 ↩
3 Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar HaSelichos ch. 8 ↩
4 Igros Kodesh vol. 1 p. 17 ↩
5 Kuntres HaSiddur os 6 ↩
6 There, in os 7 ↩
7 Yerushalayim 5, p. 86, the note of HaRI"M ↩
8 Yerushalayim 7, p. 85, the note of R' D. Goldberg ↩
[10] (Halacha 727)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [4]
Question: Are there particular laws for the saying of V'Hu Rachum?
Answer: The Rokeach wrote1: 'And the congregation say together, with all the concentration of their hearts, V'Hu Rachum, for it is a good techinah, and whoever says it with the concentration of his heart is answered; and it is full of good and precious verses'.
And the Tzeidah LaDerech2 wrote: 'One must say it with kavanah and deliberately, not as most shluchei tzibbur have become accustomed to say them with a slack tongue and in haste, without kavanah, until there is not one of the tzibbur who says it together with his fellow, but rather one is ahead and one is behind — not like those who supplicate but like those who quarrel, ad kan'.
The Orchos Chaim3 wrote: 'And they instituted to say it every day aloud and standing, so that his tefillah should be heard. And so did those who instituted it daven it at the beginning. And the Geonim z"l wrote that so have we accepted upon ourselves and upon our children forever, and whoever transgresses the enactments is called one who breaches a fence'.
And the Mahari Abuhav wrote4: 'And according to this one must be careful to say it standing'. And the Beis Yosef wrote there: 'And so is the minhag'.
However, with regard to what the Orchos Chaim wrote, that one must say it aloud, there are those who wrote that it must be said specifically in a whisper, as is written in the Hagahos HaMinhagim5: 'Three elders instituted V'Hu Rachum, each one a portion, and in each portion there are 18 azkaros corresponding to the 18 brochos; therefore it is said standing and in a whisper (I found)'.
And as to the halacha, the Mechaber wrote6: 'And it is said aloud; and if he did not say it standing7, he transgresses the enactment and is called one who breaches a fence'.
And the Erech Lechem wrote8, inferring precisely from his words: 'And if he did not say it standing. It is implied that with regard to a whisper he is not called one who breaches a fence, and so is the minhag'.
And so wrote the Rema in his hagahah: 'And so they have the minhag to say it standing, but they say it in a whisper'9. And the Magen Avraham explained10: 'In a whisper. Because it was instituted corresponding to the tefillah of Shemoneh Esrei11 (Hagahos Minhagim)'12.
And the Knesses HaGedolah wrote13: 'The words of the complete sage, the posek14, this Sinai, are all straightforward to one who understands and upright to those who find knowledge. And indeed it is true that there was no need to draw out the scribe's inkwell over such simple matters, and as the complete sage נר"ו has well proven, that as to saying it in a whisper or aloud there is no impediment, and both alike are good, and each and every place according to its minhag. And in the sefer Tzeidah LaDerech, maamar 1, klal 1, ch. 38, he wrote: and the early ones instituted V'Hu Rachum etc., and one may not be lenient in them, and one must say them with kavanah and deliberately, not as most shluchei tzibbur have become accustomed to say them with a slack tongue and in haste, without kavanah, until there is not one of the tzibbur who says it together with his fellow, but rather one is ahead and one is behind, not like those who supplicate and not like those who quarrel, ad kan. And whether they said it in a whisper or aloud, and even standing or seated, is not mentioned in his words — learn from this that there is no insistence, and each river follows its own course. And even though from his words it is proven that it is said aloud, it is possible that such was the minhag of his place, but not as an impediment'.
And the Levush wrote15: 'And they say V'Hu Rachum as it is in the siddurim. And they had the minhag to say it standing and in a whisper, just as one says the tefillah of Shemoneh Esrei, because three elders instituted this V'Hu Rachum, each one a portion, and in each one there are 18 azkaros corresponding to the 18 brochos; and therefore it is said standing and in a whisper, and one who does not say it, behold he breaches a fence and a snake shall bite him'.
And the Eliyah Rabbah wrote16: 'But from the Levush it is implied that only if he did not say it at all is he one who breaches a fence'17.
The Gaon R' Ch. Palaji wrote18: 'The minhag of our city Izmir יע"א is to say V'Hu Rachum on Monday and Thursday in a whisper and not aloud — see the responsa of Harav Knesses HaGedolah, the Orach Chaim section, siman 200, see there — except on account of any trouble that should not come, when it is said aloud'.
If so, we have seen that it is fitting to say V'Hu Rachum with kavanah and standing; and in the view of the Mechaber it must be said aloud, while the Rema and others of the poskim of Sefard wrote that it must be said in a whisper. And one who does not say it standing is one who breaches a fence, but there are those who say that this applies only to one who does not say it at all.
Notes:
1 Peirushei Siddur HaTefillah of the Rokeach [67] ↩
2 Maamar 1, klal 1, ch. 37 ↩
3 Vol. 1, the law of what is added on Monday and Thursday after Shemoneh Esrei, os 1 ↩
4 OC siman 134 ↩
5 On Sefer HaMinhagim (Tirna), the minhag of a weekday, os 18 ↩
6 OC siman 134 se'if 1 ↩
7 And there are those who wrote (Ashei Yisroel ch. 25 note 19) that by law one must stand only until the conclusion of V'Hu Rachum, at the saying of שמע ישראל ה"א ה' אחד ↩
8 Masa Chaim OC siman 134 s"k 1 ↩
9 However, to note from what the Pri Megadim, Eishel Avrohom s"k 1, wrote: In a whisper. See the Magen Avraham. 'Not like those who raise their voices exceedingly' ↩
10 S.k. 1 ↩
11 And to note from the Shevet Mussar ch. 31, who wrote: 'V'Hu Rachum, which is said on Monday and Thursday, *should be said with the feet close to one another, like the 18 brochos* (Maharsha"l)' ↩
12 The Toras Chaim Sofer (Schreiber), siman 134 s"k 1, wrote: 'See the Tur, who wrote that afterwards they fall on their faces, and the Mechaber omitted this, for the minhag of Sefard is that nefilas apayim is before they say V'Hu Rachum .. And one may reconcile the minhag of Ashkenaz, who say V'Hu Rachum in a whisper as is explained in the Rema, that it was instituted corresponding to the tefillah of Shemoneh Esrei and is like one lengthy tefillah together with the Shemoneh Esrei; which is not so according to the minhag of Sefard, who say it aloud, and if so it is not similar to the Shemoneh Esrei, therefore they place nefilas apayim first' ↩
13 Responsa siman 5 ↩
14 Harav Shlomo ben Ezra, whose words are brought in the responsa there, siman 4 ↩
15 OC siman 134 se'if 1 ↩
16 Siman 134 s"k 3 ↩
17 In Responsa Revavos Efraim vol. 6 siman 61 os 2 he wrote that one who did not say V'Hu Rachum in the tefillah should make it up during the day, since the entire day is its time ↩
18 Minhagim, maareches Tav, os 261 ↩
[10] (Halacha 728)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [5]
Question: What is the source of the piyut ה' אלוקי ישראל .. הבט משמים וראה?
Answer: It is written in the Machzor Vitry1: 'On Monday and on Thursday, after all his requests, the shliach tzibbur says here, with a supplicating heart and with concentration of the heart, and the whole congregation answer after him: י"י אלהי ישראל שוב מחרון אפך והנחם על הרעה לעמך. הבט משמים וראה היינו לעג וקלס בגוים נחשבנו למלך כשה לטבח [יובל] להרוג לאבד למכה ולחרפה ובכל זאת שמך הגדול לא שכחנו נא אל אל תשכחינו. י"י: חוסה י"י עלינו ברחמיך ואל תתננו בידי אכזרים למה יאמרו העמים איה נא אלהיהם למענך עשה עמנו חסד ואל תאחר אנא שוב מחרונך ורחם סגולה אשר בחרת. י"י: זרים אומרים אין תוחלת ותקוה הון אום לשמך מקוה טהור ישועתינו וגאלתינו קרבה יגענו ולא הונח לנו רחמיך יכבשו את כעסך מעלינו אנא שוב מחרון אף ורחם סגולה אשר בחרת. י"י: קולינו תשמע ותחון ואל תטשנו למחות את שמנו זכור אשר נשבעת לאבותינו ככוכבי השמים ועתה נשארנו מעט מהרבה ובכל זאת שמך הגדול לא שכחנו נא אל אל תשכחינו. י"י ניתן בעפר פינו ונכפש באפר כחינו כי מאד שבענו מרורים ורוינו לענה ורוש ולא שב ממנו חרון ובעתה. ובכל זאת שמך הגדול לא שכחנו נא אל אל תשכחינו: י"י אלהי כו'. עזרינו אלהי ישענו על דבר כבוד שמך והצילנו וכפר על חטאתינו למען שמך י"י אלהי ישראל שוב מחרון אפך והנחם על הרעה לעמך'.
And with regard to the composer of this piyut, the Rokeach wrote2: 'Thus I found in the handwriting of Rabbeinu HeChassid zt"l, that the tefillah of ה' אלהי ישראל was composed by Chizkiyah king of Yehudah3, when Sancheriv besieged Yerushalayim and sought to destroy it; and he arose at the second hour of the night and went up to the Beis HaMikdash and composed the tefillah of ה' אלהי ישראל. And it contains 136 words, two more, on account of those two hours; and he signed his name in reverse, out of the great humility that was in him: ח'וסה ה', ז'רים אומרים, ק'ולינו תשמע, ה' אלהי ישראל, ה'בט משמים — behold חזקי"ה in the initial letters of the stanzas. And that which he placed ה' אלהי ישראל first and afterwards composed הבט משמים is because he intended, for the honor of the Name, to compose it at the beginning, since it appeared to him a disgrace to compose the Name at the end. But according to the words of my teacher, my relative, of Moreinu Harav Shmuel of Bamberg zt"l, you will find only 130 words, for he did not have the reading in the stanza (חזקי"ה) of 'חוסה ה' עלינו' — two words; and the reading is thus: not 'עמנו חסד', but rather למענך עשה ואל תאחר, for so is the full verse. And Rabbeinu HeChassid zt"l further wrote concerning that which they have the minhag to say ה' אלהי ישראל between one stanza and another, and at its end three times: that when you count everything together, including all the repetitions that they repeat, you will find 198 words, to say that he brought his father out of the judgment of Gehinnom through his tefillah. And if we count the repetition that the congregation repeat at its beginning, ה' אלהי ישראל, after the chazan has said it, you will find 204 words, but one word more; and one need not be particular over one extra word nor over one word lacking, for the gematria is disqualified only by one word more or less.
And as to the words of the French, who add one stanza, ויתן בעפר פיהו — the thing that they do is not good, and they will in the future have to give a reckoning for their addition to the tefillah. And Rabbeinu HeChassid zt"l also wrote in the 'Sefer HaSod' that ובכל זאת שמך לא שכחנו is to be said only in the first stanza and in the fourth stanza, and he wrote a proof and a great secret, but there is no time to expand here.
הבט משמים — 23 words; and likewise from כל זאת באתנו until צלמות, and adjoined to it ולא שכחנו, 23 words. זרים — in this techinah there are 28 words, corresponding to the 28 times in the week, two in each day and two in each night; and corresponding to them are the 28 letters in יהא שמיה רבא מברך לעלם לעלמי עלמיא — that is to say, Yisroel do not listen to the nations at all those times, but rather bless His Name at night. חוסה ה' עלינו ברחמיך — in this techinah there are 27 words, corresponding to the 27 letters with the finals; that is to say, the Torah has pity upon us. קולנו תשמע ותחון — in this techinah there are 31 words, corresponding to the 31 words in the mizmor אלי אלי למה עזבתני. There are those who are particular to erase it, and it appears to me to be a mistake'.
The reason for saying this piyut specifically on Monday and Thursday: the Mateh Moshe wrote4: 'And that which we say it on Monday and Thursday is because then is the day of assembly, when they gather together on account of the reading of the Torah; and also the batei din sit to render judgment. And in every place where Yisroel gather, ה' אלהי ישראל is said, like פני האדון יי אלהי ישראל (Shemos 34:23), because they gather there to go up for the festival. ה' אלהי ישראל seven times, that the Holy One, blessed be He, should turn back from His fierce anger, with which He waged war with seven, as it is said in Yirmiyahu (21:5) ונלחמתי אני אתם ביד נטויה ובזרוע חזקה באף וחימה ובקצף גדול; and Chazal expounded (the Haggadah of Pesach): ביד נטויה — two; ובזרוע חזקה — two, behold four; and אף and חימה and קצף, behold seven. And corresponding to the seven expressions in the tochacha in Toras Kohanim: ואם לא תשמעו לי, ואם בחקותי תמאסו, ואם את משפטי תגעל נפשכם, ואם עד אלה לא תוסרו, ואם בזאת לא תשמעו לי, ואם תלכו עמי בקרי, ואם באלה לא תוסרו לי'.
If so, we have seen that the piyut הבט משמים — there are those who say that it was composed already in the time of the first Beis HaMikdash by Chizkiyah the king; and the reason for saying it on Monday and Thursday is because that is the day on which they gather to hear the reading of the Torah, and when there is a gathering of Yisroel, ה' אלוקי ישראל מלך is said; and this piyut is to be said with supplication and with concentration of the heart.
--------------
Notes:
1 Siman 93 ↩
2 Peirushei Siddur HaTefillah of the Rokeach [72], nefilas apayim pp. 403-404 ↩
3 It is written in the siddur Avodas Yisroel: 'And behold, concerning this techinah of ours they wrote in the name of Rabbi Yehudah HeChassid that Chizkiyah the king composed it; and if it is a tradition we shall accept it, but if it is a matter of reasoning there is a reply — for the signature of the name that they found in it is in truth not there, since the stanza השם אלוקי ישראל is not part of the body of the techinah, as we have seen, and it begins with the word הבט משמיים, and if so it does not contain the yud of the יו"ד. But the content of the techinah tells us the time of its composition, for it was composed in the days of the decrees at the end of the fifth millennium. We have also seen from the manner of its composition that it was originally a large piyut following the order of the alef-beis, and that it has not remained in its entirety, for they shortened it, either so as not to burden the tzibbur or for another reason; and we have no more of it than the stanzas of the letters ה ו ז ח נ and ק. And the stanza of the letter nun is not in our seforim, but I found it in an old manuscript placed before the stanza of חוסה השם, and it is clear to me that its proper place is after the stanza of חוסה' ↩
4 Amud HaAvodah, Monday and Thursday and Monday, siman 220 ↩
[11] (Halacha 729)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [6]
Question: Which is said first, the additions of Monday and Thursday or Viduy?
Answer: It is written in Seder Rav Amram Gaon1: 'And the tzibbur fall on their faces and ask for mercy, and each and every one requests his request ..'.
And the Rambam2 wrote: 'And after he completes the entire tefillah he sits and falls on his face and inclines slightly, he and the entire tzibbur, and he supplicates while he is fallen; and he sits up and raises his head, he and the rest of the people, and supplicates a little aloud while seated; and afterwards the shliach tzibbur stands alone and says Kaddish a second time, and they answer in the way that they answer at first'.
And so wrote the Tur3: 'After the shliach tzibbur finishes the repetition of the tefillah they fall on their faces and supplicate'.
If so, from the words of the Rishonim it is understood that the order on ordinary days is that immediately upon concluding Shemoneh Esrei they fall on their faces.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch4: 'After the shliach tzibbur has finished the repetition of the tefillah they fall on their faces and supplicate, each place according to its minhag'. [But below we shall see what the Alter Rebbe wrote in the Siddur].
However, regarding the additions of Monday and Thursday, it is written in Minhagei Mahari"l5: 'On Monday and Thursday, even if he had finished V'Hu Rachum and sat down in his place, nevertheless he would wait until the shliach tzibbur fell in supplication, and then he would fall together with him'.
That is to say, from the conduct of the Mahari"l we see that he said the addition of V'Hu Rachum on Monday and Thursday before nefilas apayim.
And so wrote the Levush6: 'And it is said immediately after the shliach tzibbur finishes the repetition of the tefillah, before the nefilas apayim of Rachum V'Chanun, in order to juxtapose it to the tefillah of Shemoneh Esrei, and afterwards they fall as on the rest of the days'.
However, it is written in the Zohar7: 'After he concludes he stands on his feet to confess his sins, so that there should be no opening of the mouth for the sitra achra to accuse him, and it is subdued before him, and he stands in his standing to be blessed from the house of the King'.
That is to say, the Zohar mentioned that besides nefilas apayim there must also be Viduy.
And it is written in the writings of the AriZal in Pri Etz Chaim8: 'After the repetition of the Amidah by the shliach tzibbur, he should say Viduy, detailing his sins, together with the kahal, before Vayaavor, and afterwards he should say the 13 middos. And on Monday and Thursday, he should say Viduy, Vayaavor and nefilas apayim immediately, in order to juxtapose the Viduy immediately after the drawing down of the drop in Sim Shalom, so that his sins should not hold back the chassodim, as will be written b'ezras Hashem. And afterwards Vayaavor, the zivug of Leah, since the light in them is great and must spread forth, so that the lower ones should receive light. And afterwards nefilas apayim, the drawing down of the drop from Yaakov to Rochel. And afterwards he returns and begins, Anshei Amanah, Vayaavor etc., Al Taas etc., Mah Nomar, Vayaavor etc.; and even though the zivug has already been made there is no concern, for this is the secret that he cohabits and repeats, a double zivug, and it is a deep matter. Afterwards V'Hu Rachum while standing'.
And so it is in Shaar HaKavanos9: 'Between the repetition of the Amidah and nefilas apayim he should not interrupt at all whatsoever, except with the saying of the Viduy "אלקינו ואלקי את"ל כו'". And afterwards he should say Vayaavor and the 13 middos one time, and immediately do nefilas apayim. And those 11 pesukim that are written in the siddur of Bnei Sefarad should not be said at all whatsoever, neither then nor afterwards .. for nefilas apayim he should place his head between his knees with his face pressed to the ground, as the Rambam z"l wrote; and when he finishes he raises his head and says 'Avinu Malkeinu' while seated, until 'Ozreinu Elokei Yisheinu etc.'. And if it is on Monday or on Thursday, then he should rise and say the order of 'V'Hu Rachum' that is printed in the siddur of Bnei Sefarad, but he should not say that order between the repetition of the tefillah and nefilas apayim. Rather, after the pesukim of 'Ozreinu Elokei Yisheinu etc.' he should say 'Kel Melech Yoshev etc., Vayaavor, V'Anshei Emunah etc., Vayaavor etc., Tamahnu etc., Vayaavor etc., Elokeinu V'Elokei Avoseinu Al Taas etc.', and afterwards the entire order of 'V'Hu Rachum etc.' And afterwards they sit and the shliach tzibbur says Kaddish until 'da'amiran b'alma'.
And based on this the Shaarei Teshuvah10 wrote: 'And even on Monday and Thursday the minhag in Eretz Yisroel and the rest of the Sefardic lands is to place nefilas apayim before V'Hu Rachum, and so is the minhag in some places in these lands as well; and see in ש"ץ that so it is implied in the Zohar Parshas Terumah, and so it is written in Minhagei HaAri z"l'.
And so wrote the Chida11: 'Immediately after the repetition of the Amidah one should say Viduy and nefilas apayim, even on Monday and Thursday. (The Ari z"l)'.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur: 'After Shemoneh Esrei at Shacharis and at Mincha one says Viduy'. And the additions of Monday and Thursday the Alter Rebbe placed there after nefilas apayim.
And from these words of his in the Siddur we learn that according to our minhag one says Viduy first, and afterwards nefilas apayim, and not according to the minhag mentioned above from the Rishonim and in the words of the Alter Rebbe in the Shulchan Aruch.
If so, there are those who had the minhag to do nefilas apayim immediately after Shemoneh Esrei, and on Monday and Thursday they placed the saying of V'Hu Rachum before everything; but in practice, according to the Zohar and the AriZal, one must always place the Viduy before nefilas apayim and the additions of Monday and Thursday afterwards, and so is the Chabad minhag.
Notes:
1 Nefilas apayim and Kedusha D'Sidra ↩
2 Hilchos Tefillah ch. 9 halacha 5 ↩
3 OC siman 131 ↩
4 OC siman 131 se'if 1 ↩
5 Hilchos Tefillah ↩
6 OC siman 134 se'if 1 ↩
7 Parshas Pekudei 262, 1 ↩
8 Shaar HaSelichos ch. 8 ↩
9 The topic of tefillas Shacharis. And see also the topic of the kavanah of the repetition of the Amidah ch. 5 ↩
10 OC siman 131 s"k 1 ↩
11 Kesher Gudal siman 19 os 1 ↩
[12] (Halacha 730)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [7]
Question: What is the source of the piyut Shomer Yisroel, and when must it be said?
Answer: The piyut Shomer Yisroel is an early piyut, but it is not known who composed it, and among the Kadmonim this piyut appears as part of the Selichos1 of a public fast, or as part of the Selichos of the month of Elul and the Yomim Noraim, as is written in Seder Troyes2 in the order of the Selichos for the Yomim Noraim and the Aseres Yemei Teshuvah: 'Shomer Yisroel, Shomer Goy Kadosh, Shomer Goy Echad, Avinu Malkeinu Chaneinu etc., until V'Hoshieinu, Kaddish Shalem'.
And so too in Minhagei Mahari"l the piyut is mentioned in the order of the fasts of the 17th of Tammuz, the 10th of Teves, and Taanis Esther.
And in Sefer HaMinhagim - Tirna3 the piyut is brought as part of the Selichos of Elul: 'And he says Machei U'Masei, Machnisei Rachamim, Maran D'Vishmaya etc., K'var Shavya D'Mischanan etc., Maran K'Avda etc., Shomer Yisroel etc., V'Anachnu Lo Neida, and Kaddish Shalem'4.
The chachomim of Sefarad too mentioned this piyut, in the Selichos, as Rabbi Yisrael Alnakawa wrote in Menoras HaMaor5: 'And they had the minhag to say in the middle of the Selichos pizmonim and piyutim of supplication. And they fall on their faces, and the shliach tzibbur says a techinah while seated, and he says Im Avoneinu, Al Tiktzof. Asanu Marana D'Vishmaya. Misratzeh B'Rachamim. Shomer Yisroel, Machei U'Masei. Chaim Sha'alnu Mimcha, Rachamim Bikashnu Mimcha. Eilecha Hashem Nasasi Einai'.
If so, in practice we have seen that among the Kadmonim the minhag was to say the piyut Shomer Yisroel only in the saying of Selichos on fast days, or in the Selichos of the Yomim Noraim.
And such was the minhag of Ashkenaz, as the Yaavetz wrote in his siddur, and so it is written in Maaseh Rav6. And as the Mahara"m Schick wrote7: 'That 'Shomer Yisroel' in Ashkenaz is said only on a public fast and the like, and likewise there are other minhogim as is explained in the Shulchan Aruch'.
And the Mekor Chaim wrote8: 'The minhag is that Shomer Yisroel is said only on a public fast, and at Shacharis and not at Mincha, and it appears to me that this is because it contains 'those who say Shema Yisroel', 'those who say Hashem Echad', 'those who say Kadosh', and there is no kedushah and unification of the kingship of Heaven except at Shacharis'.
And there is support for his reasoning in the words of the Shelah9, who wrote: 'And moreover, Krias Shema and the tefillah itself are mentioned by allusion in the Selichos, namely what we say at the end of 'Shomer Yisroel' etc. until .. 'those who say Shema Yisroel'. And afterwards we say 'Shomer Goy Echad' etc. until .. 'those who unify Your name, ה' אלהינו ה' אחד', and this is the Krias Shema of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi10, and afterwards we say 'Shomer Goy Kadosh' etc. until .. 'those who triple in three kedushos to the Holy One', just as we say in the tefillah three times Kadosh. And just as after the tefillah we fall on our faces to say a techinah, so after the Selichos they say Tachanun and conclude with 'V'Anachnu Lo Neida'.
However, there are communities that had the minhag to say Shomer Yisroel every day, as is explained in the words of the Chasam Sofer11: Yesterday there reached me a letter from a certain gaon from Galicia, weeping and lamenting over the spread of the illness of cholera, Rachmana litzlan, and particularly in the holy communities of Lvov and Brod, and many have already died, Rachmana litzlan. And he requested of me to increase supplications and pleas for mercy on behalf of the remnant that is found. And indeed certainly everyone whose heart the fear of God has touched will arouse his heart and pour out speech and supplications, and will mention them for good before the Good and Beneficent One, yisborach Shemo, perhaps God will take thought and hear our tefillah .. And it appears to me to add further that the shliach tzibbur should say every day, before Shomer Yisroel, those 'Yehi Ratzon milifnei Avinu Shebashamayim' that are said at the Torah reading, and if PR"M and my beis din agree to this in halacha'.
And so wrote the Aruch HaShulchan12: 'And after he raises his head after nefilas apayim he supplicates a little, each and every place according to its minhag, and our minhag is to say Shomer Yisroel etc. until V'Hoshieinu, and afterwards they say V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh'13.
And so it is written in Siddur Avodas Yisroel: 'In Ashkenaz they say the piyut Shomer Yisroel on a public fast, and in many communities every day'.
But we find also a third minhag, which is to say it only on Monday and Thursday, as is seen in the Siddur of the Shelah14, where Shomer Yisroel appears only in the additions of Monday and Thursday; and so it is in the siddurim of the AriZal, Kol Yaakov, which wrote: 'And on Monday and Thursday, when the Beis Din on High is in session, they increase in supplication, and they say V'Hu Rachum, Hashem Elokei Yisroel, Shomer Yisroel ..'. And so it is in the siddurim of the AriZal of the Rav Hakadosh R' Shabsi of Rashkov and the Rav Hakadosh R' Avraham Shimshon of Rashkov.
And so it is in the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe, where the piyut Shomer Yisroel is found after the piyut Habet MiShamayim, and after Shomer Yisroel it is written: 'Up to here is what is added on Monday and Thursday'.
If so, we have seen that the Kadmonim had the minhag to say the piyut Shomer Yisroel only on a public fast or in the Selichos, and there are those who had the minhag to say it every day; but in the Siddur of the Shelah and in some of the siddurim of the AriZal it is brought to say it on Monday and Thursday, and such is our minhag.
--------------
Notes:
1 And see Siddur Tzelosa D'Avraham p. 355 ↩
2 By Rabbi Menachem b'R' Yosef Chazan (of the rabbonim of the city of Troyes, in the first century of the sixth millennium) siman 9 ↩
3 Elul, the days of Selichos ↩
4 And the piyut is likewise mentioned for Taanis Esther in the glosses to the Minhogim for Purim ↩
5 Ch. 2 - Tefillah, Tikkun HaAshmuros ↩
6 Os 50 ↩
7 Responsa OC siman 40 ↩
8 (Bacharach) OC siman 134 se'if 1, and see also siman 131 se'if 1, and se'if 6 ↩
9 Maseches Chullin, in the hagahah, perek Derech Chaim Tochachas Mussar ↩
10 Berachos 13b ↩
11 Likkutim in Kovetz Teshuvos siman 1 ↩
12 OC siman 131 se'if 9 ↩
13 And to note from what he wrote there se'if 5: 'And therefore the Rambam in ch. 9 in the order of the tefillah wrote in halacha 5 that after he completes the entire tefillah he sits and falls on his face and inclines slightly, he and the entire tzibbur, and he supplicates while he is fallen, and he sits and raises his head, he and the rest of the people, and supplicates a little aloud while seated, end of his words — that is to say that after the techinah they say something, as by us Shomer Yisroel or V'Anachnu Lo Neida'. And in Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 3 siman 55 he wrote: 'And the Rambam continues, 'and he sits and raises his head, he and the rest of the people, and supplicates a little aloud while seated', that is to say that the tefillah of Shomer Yisroel is said specifically aloud and while seated, and it appears that this is the order: to say it quietly and afterwards aloud together, and it is fitting to be careful in this' ↩
14 First edition - in Amsterdam, the year 5477 ↩
[13] (Halacha 831)
The addition on Monday and Thursday [8] (continuation of Halacha number 730)
Question: Why are the pesukim of V'Anachnu Lo Neida said at the conclusion of the saying of Tachanun, and what is the manner of saying them?
Answer: It is written in Seder Rav Amram Gaon1: 'And the chazzan stands and says Avinu Malkeinu, be gracious to us and answer us, for we have no deeds. Deal with us with tzedakah and save us for the sake of Your name. ואנחנו לא נדע מה נעשה כי עליך עינינו2 ("and we do not know what to do, for our eyes are upon You"). And the tzibbur answer after him what he says'.
And in Machzor Vitry3 it is written: 'And the chazzan stands on his feet and says these pesukim quietly. And the tzibbur likewise. And on the rest of the days too they say immediately after the techinah, V'Anachnu Lo Neida ..'.
The Rambam4 wrote: 'The people had the minhag to supplicate after nefilas panim, when he raises his face from the ground, with these pesukim: ואנחנו לא נדע מה נעשה ("and we do not know what to do") .. והצילנו וכפר על חטאתינו למען שמך ("and deliver us and atone for our sins for the sake of Your name")'.
And regarding the reason for saying these pesukim, it is brought in the Siddur of Rabbi Shlomo of Germaiza, from the siddur of Chassidei Ashkenaz5: 'Therefore this Kaddish (that follows Tachanun) is said for the conclusion of the tefillah of Yotzer, and because they required a Kaddish they preceded it with these pesukim, V'Anachnu Lo Neida, Zechor Rachamecha, for Kaddish is not said unless pesukim are said before it, as is proven in Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer, that in the future, after HaKadosh Baruch Hu reveals the reasons of the Torah, Zerubavel ben She'altiel will stand and say Kaddish; and likewise every place where you find that the chachomim required the order of kedushah (that is to say, Kaddish) they preceded it with pesukim .. of the composition of Harav R' Eliezer son of Harav R' [Yehudah b'R'] Kalonymus, end of his words'.
And the Rokeach6 wrote: 'V'Anachnu Lo Neida. There is astonishment as to why they had the minhag to say it after Habet MiShamayim. And it appears that since they have already davened while seated, and while standing, and while lying, and with the face covered, therefore they say from now V'Anachnu Lo Neida'.
And the Machkim7 wrote: 'And he falls on his face, and upon rising he says V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh, and likewise at each of his risings in the techinos; and likewise the chazzan said V'Anachnu Lo Neida, for we have davened while seated and while standing and with falling on the face, but in this we have trusted, for our eyes are upon You'.
And this is the language of the Abudraham8: 'And afterwards they say V'Anachnu Lo Neida etc., and it is a pasuk in Divrei Hayamim, and he says scattered pesukim from Tehillim. And the reason that they had the minhag to say V'Anachnu Lo Neida, that is to say, we have already done as Moshe did on the mountain when he ascended to receive the Torah, who said at first ואשב בהר ("and I sat on the mountain") in the language of sitting, and afterwards ואנכי עמדתי בהר ("and I stood on the mountain"). And afterwards ואתנפל לפני ה' ("and I fell down before Hashem"). And so have we done: at first Pesukei D'Zimrah while seated, and afterwards Shemoneh Esrei while standing, and afterwards nefilas apayim; and Mincha — we do not know how to daven in another manner, and this is V'Anachnu Lo Neida. And afterwards the shliach tzibbur stands and says Kaddish until l'eila'.
And in the writings of the AriZal9 it is brought: 'From the chaveirim - after this they say Avinu Malkeinu Atah, four times Avinu etc., V'Anachnu Lo Neida. And the kavanah is that even though he davened while seated corresponding to Knesses Yisrael, and while standing corresponding to Tiferes, and we fell on our faces, with all this we acknowledge that we have no deeds, but rather that He should act for the sake of His great name, and this is כי עליך עינינו ("for our eyes are upon You"). And if there are sins in us, that He should pass over each one in turn, and for this he said Al Tizkor Lanu etc. Therefore you will find in it 108 words, corresponding to הוי"ה which equals 106 as is known, and it is composed of din and rachamim, thus 108. And it corresponds to yesod, which is called chok, and Knesses Yisrael is called חקה, as it says זאת חקת התורה ("this is the chukas HaTorah")'.
And regarding the manner of the saying, it is written in Shaar HaKavanos10: 'For nefilas apayim he should place his head between his knees with his face pressed to the ground, as the Rambam z"l wrote; and when he finishes he raises his head and says 'Avinu Malkeinu' while seated, until 'Ozreinu Elokei Yisheinu etc.''.
On the other hand the Shelah11 wrote, and the Magen Avraham brought it12: 'And I saw one shliach tzibbur who was an exceedingly fitting shliach tzibbur, and his minhag was to say these words, 'V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh', aloud. 'V'Anachnu Lo Neida' he said while seated, 'Mah Naaseh' he said while standing. And he would say that so it was a tradition in his hand'.
If so, according to the AriZal in Shaar HaKavanos the saying of V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh is while seated, and according to the Shelah, V'Anachnu Lo Neida is while seated and Mah Naaseh while standing.
The Alter Rebbe13 wrote: 'After he has fallen on his face he raises his head and supplicates a little while seated, each and every place according to its minhag; and the simple minhag is to say V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh etc., because we have davened in every manner in which a man can daven — while seated, and while standing, and with nefilas apayim — as Moshe Rabbeinu, olov hasholom, did, as it says ואשב בהר וגו' ("and I sat on the mountain") ואתנפל לפני ה' וגו' ("and I fell down before Hashem"); and since we have no strength to daven in another manner we say V'Anachnu Lo Neida Mah Naaseh etc., and afterwards half Kaddish'.
And there are those who wrote14 that the Alter Rebbe omitted the words of the Shelah because he does not hold like his words, and everything must be while seated, as is written in Shaar HaKavanos.
But seemingly it may be said that the words of the Alter Rebbe in the Shulchan Aruch were said with regard to Nusach Ashkenaz, in which they did not say Avinu Malkeinu before the saying of V'Anachnu Lo Neida; and since one must supplicate a little while seated, this is fulfilled with the saying of the pesukim of V'Anachnu Lo Neida, and therefore he did not mention the minhag of the Shelah to stand at the words 'Mah Naaseh'. But according to the nusach of the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur, in which the short Avinu Malkeinu is said before the saying of V'Anachnu Lo Neida, if so it is possible to fulfill everything: to sit for Avinu Malkeinu and for the words V'Anachnu Lo Neida, and to stand for the words Mah Naaseh, like the minhag of the Shelah.
And so it is a maaseh rav15, the conduct of the Rebbe - like the words of the Shelah, to say 'V'Anachnu Lo Neida' while seated, and 'Mah Naaseh' while standing.
--------------
Notes:
1 Nefilas apayim and Kedusha D'Sidra, and see also in Tefillas HaMincha ↩
2 Divrei Hayamim II 20, 12 ↩
3 Siman 93 ↩
4 Seder Tefillos, the nusach of Kaddish ↩
5 P. 116 ↩
6 Hilchos Brochos, introduction ↩
7 Tefillas HaMincha ↩
8 Nefilas apayim, Ashrei, Lamnatzeach, U'Va L'Tzion ↩
9 Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar Nefilas Apayim ch. 7 ↩
10 The topic of tefillas Shacharis ↩
11 Maseches Tamid, perek Ner Mitzvah ↩
12 OC siman 134 s"k 4 ↩
13 Shulchan Aruch siman 131 se'if 2 ↩
14 Al Minhagim U'Mekoroseihem p. 151-2. And see the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe (Raskin) (vol. 1 p. 364, and Kovetz Heoros U'Biurim issue 1062 p. 62), which wrote to reject the proof from the omission in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe, based on the Rebbe's answer (Nesivim vol. 2 p. 225): '.. and behold, there are very many places where the Alter Rebbe does not bring distinctions in the halachos that are in the Taz and the Magen Avraham. And the rules and the reasons for this require great study'. And if so, it is not necessarily the case that in every place where the Alter Rebbe omitted the words of the Magen Avraham one may conclude that he does not hold like him ↩
15 Kovetz Minhagei Melech (Teichman) p. 29. Maaseh Melech p. 24. Halichos Menachem p. 246 ↩
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