Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Less Kavana, please.

I once walked into the Beis Medrash in Staten Island with Reb Moshe, and as we passed by a bachur that was saying Le'olam before Pesukei De'Zimra, the bachur said Shma loudly and with an emphatic Daled.  Reb Moshe remarked that it would be better if he would have less kavana.  As we walked, we discussed his reason for saying so: that the proper time to fulfill the Mitzva of Krias Shma is during Birkos Krias Shma before Shmoneh Esrei.  If a person has kavana in Le'olam, he fulfills the Mitzva then, and is no longer fulfilling the mitzva when it should properly be done, during Birkos Krias Shma.  He said that some have the minhag not even to say the entire passuk of Krias Shma in L'Olam, but only "...ve'omrim Shema Yisrael period.  Atta hu...."

Reb Moshe's remark was based on the Gaon (and the Pri Megadim) in OC 46.  The Rama there says that you should say ברוך שם in Le'Olam if you think the Tzibur might not get to Shema in time-
וטוב לומר בשחרית אחר שמע ישראל וגו' ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד, כי לפעמים שוהין עם קריאת שמע לקרותה שלא בזמנה ויוצא בזה (טור
.  The Pri Megadim there, brought in the MB SK 31, says that a person should only do this if necessary.  If it's not necessary, he should have kavana to not be Yotzei the mitzva.
יכוין שלא לצאת מצות ק''ש כשאומרו בקרבנות לפני פסוקי דזמרא אא''כ ירא שהצבור יעברו זמן ק''ש, אבל כשלא יעברו מוטב לצאת ידי ק''ש עם הצבור שבצבור יקרא כל השלשה פרשיות ובברכותיה כמו שתקנו חז''ל לכתחילה 
The Biur Halacha there brings that the Gaon disagrees with the Rama, because he reads the Rama as saying that it's alright to be yotzei then even if there's no emergency (because the Rama said
וטוב לומר... כי לפעמים שוהין,
which means it's good to do it all the time because sometimes it comes in handy,) and the Gaon argues and holds that to do so is an avla, because Chazal wanted you to be yotzei davka with their Nusach.  The Biur Halacha says
עיין בביאור הגר"א שכתב ול"נ שאין נכון בזה לצאת בלא ברכות וגם לא יסמוך גאולה לתפלה. והוא סובר בזה כשיטת הרא"ה שהובא בב"י דטפי עדיף לצבורא למימר ברכת ק"ש אק"ש דאורייתא עי"ש. ולכאורה נראה דדבריו סובבים אדברי רמ"א שמשמע מיניה שהוא מסכים להב"י במסקנתו דמוכח מיניה שסובר דאפילו אם הצבור לא יעברו זמן ק"ש אפ"ה יאמר בשכמל"ו כדי שיצא בזה והגר"א סובר דבכה"ג אינו כדאי לצאת בלא ברכות אבל אם הוא רואה שהצבור יעברו זמן ק"ש יותר טוב שיכוין לצאת כדי שלא ישאר בלא ק"ש וכמ"ש הב"ח והמ"א ושארי אחרונים או אפשר שסובר הגר"א דאפילו בזה יותר טוב שיקרא ק"ש בזמנה בברכותיה ויסמוך גאולה לתפלה ויתפלל ביחידי ממה שיקרא בלא ברכות ולהתפלל אח"כ עם הצבור וצ"ע.

Reb Aizik Ausband wrote about this idea in the Kovetz Beis Ahron v'Yisrael Torah Journal (#46, תשנ"ג/1993).  He notes that Tzur Mishelo enunciates all the central ideas of Birkas Hamazon.  As such, he said, it is not proper to sing that Zemer during a meal, because if one would do so, he will have fulfilled the Mitzva of Birkas Hamazon, if we assume that a mitzva is fulfilled by an act done without kavana.  Because we do concern ourselves with the shitta that מצות אין צריכות כונה, (and certainly where the obligation to bentch is miderabanan, where the Radvaz (brought in Magen Avraham 60 and MB there sk 10, who says we don't hold like the Radvaz,) says that everyone agrees  אין צריכות כונה, this would be a problem.

מה שנדפס בתוך הזמירות לליל שבת הזמר צור משלו אכלנו, יש למנוע מפני שהוא כנגד הג׳ ברכות של ברה״מ והא ניחא למ״ד מצות צריכות כונה שפיר דלא יצא ברה״מ בזמר זה שאינו מכוון לשם ברה״מ אבל למ״ד מצוות אין צריכות כונה הרי יצא בזמר ברה״מ ותו איך יברך אח״כ ברה״מ, ולהלכה באו״ח סימן ס׳ ס״ד הביא ב׳ דיעות ומכריע המחבר שצריכות כונה אבל הרע״א הביא שם את הפמ״ג שפירש שזה מספק לחומרא וא״ב בנ״ד שהספק הוא לחומרא שלא יאמר הזמר הזה דשמא הלכה שא״צ כונה והו״ל ברכות לבטלה, הרי שיש לחוש לזה ושלא לזמר זמר זה ואין להקשות למה המחבר של הזמר חברו וקבעו בתוך הזמירות די״ל דהוא סבר כמ״ד צריכות כונה אבל לדידן לפי הפמ״ג שהוא ספק להלכה א״כ יש להחמיר שלא לזמרו ובאמת הגר״א כתב כן שלא לזמרו ובסידורו נשמט זה.

וכש״כ בימוח החורף שאין אוכלים בסעודה ג׳ כדי שביעה מפני שהוא סמוך לסעודת שהרית דאז ברה״מ דרבנן ובדרבנן קיי״ל שא״צ כונה בודאי יש לחוש שלא תהא ברה״מ ל בטלה ובפרט לאלו שאומרים רחם בחסדך ברוב התרגשות ודבקות בבקשת רחמים על הגאולה יותר ממה שאומרים אח״כ רחם בברה״מ, שהזמר להם יותר עיקר מברה״מ דצ״ע אם עבדי כדין.

(Rav Ausband's point that this is a problem only if you hold Mitzvos do not need kavana might not be helpful in the case of Krias Shma.  After you say מה טוב חלקנו ומה נעים גורלנו.... ערב ובוקר פעמים בכל יום, when you say Shma with kavana of Kabalas Ol Malchus Shamayim and Baruch Shem, one could argue that it's not just סתמא לשמה any more- that it crosses the line from implicit to explicit, and everyone will agree that you're yotzei, even more than the Mechaber's case in OC 475:4 and the MB in 60.)

In the next issue, there was a weak response to Rav Ausband's he'ara, and I think the writer knew it was not convincing.

In a following issue (#49), Rav Eliezer Weissfish of Yerushalayim had a very lengthy defense of Tzur Mishelo, in which he discusses the absence of Bris and Torah, and the requirement for using the format of a Bracha, and many other things.  Almost all of his svaros would only apply to men (Bris, Torah, and Re'tzei on Shabbos,) so he's not helping regarding women.  Unless in his house the women didn't sing zemiros. (Unbeknownst to him, his points mirror those of the Biyur Halacha in 271 regarding the Magen Avraham and Reb Akiva Eiger on Kiddush.)

Finally (#50), someone sent in a note saying that Telzer Rov's (Reb Leizer Gordon's) son in law, Reb Yitzchok Hirshowitz, used to say Tzur Mishelo, but he used the kinui "Hashem" instead of the Sheim Adnus during Tzur Mishelo.

בענין הערתו של הרב אייזיק אזבנד, ר״י טלז בקליוולנד, (בגליון ניסן-אייר ש״ז) שלא לומר בליל שבת את הזמר ״צור משלו״ היות שהוא מכוון כנגד שלוש הברכות של ברכת המזון, הנה שמעתי (כמדומה) מהרב יהודה ליבר הירשוביץ ז״ל שאביו הרב יצחק אייזיק אליעזר ז״ל (הי״ד) רבה של ווירבאלין (ליטא) וחתנו של הרב אליעזר גורדון מטלז ז״ל היה נוהג לומר זמר זה אבל בלי הוכרת שם שמים אלא בכינוי בלבד (היינו, שהיה אומר ״השם״.


It's interesting that in the Yosef Ometz, a compilation of the minhagim of Frankfurt written by Rav Yosef Zeligman Hahn (a contemporary and colleague of the Shelah Hakadosh) in the early 1700s, he says that their minhag was to sing it after Bentching, not before Bentching.  The reason he gives (#607) is that it's not appropriate to say שבענו והותרנו until all the food on the table has been cleared away.  Later in the Sefer  (#815) he remarks that the Zemer echoes Birkas Hamazon., but he does not say that this is the reason they didn't say it before Bentching.

Reb Chaim Volozhener's talmidim (Keser Rosh #94 and Shaarei Rachamim page 10 #50) say that in Reb Chaim's house they did not say Tzur Mishelo (consistent with Rav Ausband's remark that the Gaon didn't say it.)  The notes in the Keser Rosh  bring from the author of the Birkas Rosh, one of Reb Chaim's first talmidim, that the reason is because one would thereby be yotzei Birkas Hamazon, as Rav Ausband said two hundred and seventy years later.

I just saw on Chaim B's website that he brings
the Steipler (Orchos Rabeinu vol 1.) is reported to have made sure to eat a k'zayis of bread after singing Tzur Mishelo (so that his real bentching would be on a proper shiur achila) and also had in mind specifically that it is not a hefsek.

I have to say that I don't know what the Steipler was thinking.  As we saw earlier, where I brought the discussion in OC 46,  this is all based on the Gaon, who argues with the Rama there, and holds that when Chazal instituted a nusach, it's very important to fulfill the mitzvah with that nusach- even, perhaps, at the expense of Tefilla Be'Tzibbur, or losing smichas geula litefilla.  Thus, if you were yotzei Kerias Shema or Bentching without Chazal's nusach, it's an avla.  So eating more after singing doesn't help you.  Furthermore, and even according to the Rama, there would be a problem here, because if  you were yotzei Bentching, you would not be allowed to continue eating without a new Bracha.  I'm not 100% sure about that, though, because you're still chayav to bentch with the Nusach, but I'm not far from 100% either.

Rav Ausband said that if you were yotzei earlier, the Bentching would be a bracha levatala, and for that problem, the Steipler's minhag would make sense, but I think he was exaggerating.  Although the Rambam seems to hold that way by Krias Shema, nobody says that's the halacha by Bentching.  Just because you were yotzei the De'oraysa does not mean you can no longer say the Nusach as Chazal wrote it.

Reb Akiva Eiger (in רע"א, of course,) says that if, as the Magen Avraham paskens, b'makom seuda is not deoraysa, then you'll be yotzei Kiddush Friday night when you say ah Gutten Shabbos to your friend (כל שמזכיר שבת ואומר שבתא טבא ג"כ יוצא.)  Reb Akiva Eiger doesn't say that you shouldn't say Good Shabbos before Kiddush.  There are already too many people that don't say Good Shabbos a whole Friday, because maybe it's called kabbalas Shabbos, which I think is 100% untrue in our lexicon.  So now you can't say Good Shabbos Friday night either because you'll be yotzei kiddush before you sit down at the table?  I don't think so.  So why isn't it a problem if you were yotzei the din D'oraysa before?

The answer is that Chazal were kovei'a Vayechulu in Shmoneh Esrei anyway, so you were already yotzei the D'oraysa with a nusach of Chazal anyway, and there's nothing lost by saying Good Shabbos.  But by Tzur and Shma, being yotzei earlier means that you are not being yotzei with the nusach that Chazal wanted for the Mitzva.  (I have to admit that the Chasam Sofer in 271 does say that you should have kavana not to be yotzei Kiddush De'oraysa in Shmoneh Esrei, in order that you will be yotzei the D'oraysa with wine and bimkom seuda.  Another admission- the Biur Halacha in 273:6 dh Ukegon brings a Reb Akiva Eiger, which he says is right there, that since you're required miderabanan to have wine and mekom seuda, there's an anan sahadi that you don't want to be yotzei before that in davening.  This Reb Akiva Eiger, which I can't find, is farkert from the Gaon and the Rama we brought above.)

A similar idea is found in the Rosh in Arvei Pesachim regarding a person who only has maror, and has to use the maror for Karpas at the beginning of the Seder and again during the meal for Maror, but I don't have the patience to explain why the Rosh is an excellent tzushtell.


UPDATE August 2014:
Besides the nusach issue the Gaon has, there might be another problem in repeating Krias Shema after you were yotzei- Bal Tosif.
See here, (Divrei Yakov on Parshas Va'eschanan( where he brings mipi hashmua that the Chafetz Chaim held there is bal tosif if you say krias shema for the purpose of kiyum hamitzva after the zman, and that the Chazon Ish held there is no bal tosif.  See Igros OC II:60 where Reb Moshe says there probably is no bal tosif, and he says the same svara as the Chazon Ish.

13 comments:

  1. Superintendant ChalmersDecember 27, 2013 at 9:25 AM

    See also Shu"t Vayevarech David 36 (I hope this link works)
    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?sits=1&req=9755&st=%u05e6%u05d5%u05e8+%u05de%u05e9%u05dc%u05d5

    who deals with this issue and lists some reasons why it's not a problem (like no shem umalchus, no kavanna etc.)


    He also notes that some had a different biur in the Gaon, that it's mechzi keshikra if you say veyayno shasinu and you didn't drink wine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you! Very nice mareh makom....

    I am not familiar with the mechaber of that sefer. But let's look at his six reasons for not being concerned about the issue.

    1. Shem and Malchus. He himself says it's probably not required Midoraysa, so the Gaon in OC 46 still pertains.
    2. Requirement of nusach bracha- again, he notes it's probably not Midoraysa, so we have the Gaon problem
    3. The language is "I will x, y, and z," and that's not the same as "I am x." If that were true, then what's pshat in Ashira lashem ki ga'o ga'ah? Sure, it's a reference to the geula ha'asida, but it's also for now.
    4. Bris and Torah. Fine for men, but what about women?
    5. If one does not conform with the dinim derabanan form, they yank his de'oraysa kiyum too. That's true where we find it, like shulchano toch habayis in the Ran there, or maybe Krias Shma too late. It's absolutely not a rule of general application.
    6. Mitzvos require kavana. First, as I say, we're choshesh for einan tzrichos. Second, as Rav Ausband says, every one holds that by derabanans ein tzrichos, which is most of the time we bentch.

    I'm sure he's right and I'm wrong in every one of these responses, because I'm just a guy on the internet and he's a published posek, but by golly, I sure don't know why.

    Anyway, as you saw, I bring from Reb Chaim's talmidim that the pshat is as we all assume- that you're yotzei bentching.

    Anyway, the most important thing that I pointed out, and it's something that everyone else seems to have just missed, is that the Gaon is leshitaso and not like the Rama.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Superintendant chalmersDecember 27, 2013 at 10:13 AM

    The Gaon of Tzur Mishelo may be leshitaso in another point - the MB/Biur Halacha in Siman 60 learns that the Gaon holds meikar hadin that mitzvos ain tzrichos kavanna, on both deoraysas and derabanans.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That would be nice, but I seem to remember that farkert, the Gaon holds tzrichos. I only see the Gaon holds not like the Radvaz, and that there's no diff bet deoraysas and derabanans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Superintendant ChalmersDecember 27, 2013 at 2:57 PM

      In Biur Halacha, the cheshbon is clear - from the Biur Hagra in 489 on Sfiras Haomer (who says you shouldnt tell anyone else what day it is bc Mitzvos ain tzrichos kavana) the MB infers that since he didn't answer that sfiras haomer bzh"z derabbanan, therefore the gaon holds ain tzrichos kavana on deoraysa and derabanan. This is clearly how the MB learned in the Gaon.

      There may be indications in other places that the Gaon might hold differently, I have no idea, but following through the MB's cheshbon, he learned in the Gaon ain tzrichos kavana across the board.

      Delete
    2. I checked the Gaon inside. He says clearly that he holds Tzrichos. The Biur Hagra in Sefiras Ha'omer says like that too. All he says there is that the mechaber's din that if you answer and say "Today's 23" you can't make a bracha afterwards is that this is only true IF you hold ETzK. But if you hold TzK, you can make a bracha afterwards. The Gaon says nothing about what he holds; in fact, he says clearly in the likutim that he holds TzK. In fact, this creates a problem. Why would the Gaon be bothered by Tzur, if you didn't davka have kavana to be yotzei? My feeling is, as I discuss in my response to Tal Benschar below, is that even if you're not yotzei, it's not the right thing to do, to say the leshonos of hakaras hatov without kavana or with kavana misnagedes. But that's just speculation on my part.

      Delete
    3. Superintendant ChalmersDecember 31, 2013 at 8:18 AM

      You are correct, the Gaon in siman 60 holds MTzK, and I misread what the MB was inferring. However, I think from 489, you see that he (or the S"A according to him) is choshesh for the man deamar AtzK with regard to not making a bracha after a mitzva was done without kavanna, so I think the leshitaso is still valid as far as explaining why he would hold Tzur is a problem, bc the Gaon is choshesh for AtzK w.r.t. making a bracha afterwards.

      Delete
    4. Yes, after writing last night, I realized that although the Gaon in the Likutim does say that he paskens Tzrichos, we have no proof that he is not choshesh for the shitta of Ein Tzrichos. So it's not a leshitaso in the Gaon any more than anyone else, but at least it's not shver. He discouraged singing Tzur because of the chashash of Ein Tzrichos.

      Delete
  5. Rabbi, could we conceptualize Tzur Mishelo as corresponding to "tochal v'savata" in
    Devarim 8:12 (while Bircas Hamazone clearly corresponds to 8:10)? Pesukim 8:11-8:20 closely resonate with the song of Ha'azinu, a song with six Rocks; Tzur Mishelo casts those same six Rocks in a positive setting.
    So Tzur Mishelo wouldn't be a possible preplacement of Bircas Hamazone, but its
    conscientious compliment, as it additively addresses 8:12 (and Ha'azinu) by building good houses (where Bircas Hamazone is not forgotten) only after blessing Him (in Tzur) for His gift of good land.

    Why sing it Friday night? Because that is when one might be tempted to think that
    the might of his weekday hand had made him his Shabbos overflow, 8:17, a time when
    Yeshurune grows fat, 32:15.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for writing.
      Your comment will require study and thought, and that's what Shabbos is for. But I wish you would try to be a little more clear. Don't try to be too terse. I don't mind if you write a lot.

      Delete
  6. Doesn't eveyone agree that if you have specific kavannah NOT to be yotsei that helps, even if you hold mitzvos ein tsrichos kavannah? If so, just announce before Tsur Mishelo NOT to be yotsei bentching.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yes, all the poskim agree that kavana to not be yotzei works, but that's true lehalacha, and that's exactly what the Pri Megadim says about the first Krias Shma. His language is "if you see that the time is passing, have kavana to be yotzei....if the time will not pass, have kavana to not be yotzei...because everything depends on the kavana." In fact, Reb Akiva Eiger there says that you should just do a tnai, citing the Beis Yosef by Sefiras Ha'Omer. So I don't know why that's not suggested for Tzur. But I have to admit that to do a ma'aseh mitzva with kavana to not be yotzei is, to me, grotesque and something of a chutzpah- especially by Birkas Hamazon. I know that nobody says like that. But doesn't it feel strange, you're thanking the Ribono shel Olam for the sustenance, and you have kavana to not be yotzei the mitzva of thanking the Ribono shel Olam for the sustenance? That's what reminds me of the Gemara in Arvei Pesachim about "Le'achar she'mila kreiso meihem, mevarech?" It's not a perfect tzushtell, but still, to me it elicits the same sense of wrongness.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Superintendant ChalmersDecember 31, 2013 at 8:02 AM

      Might not work for the Gaon though, as I believe the Gaon's preferred method of bentching on lulav and Esrog is to hold them with kavanna to not be yotze.

      Delete