#RebChaim #3

Home Forums Bais Medrash #RebChaim #3

  • This topic contains 1 voice and has 0 replies.
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
  • #1568221


    #Rebchaim #03 version 2 6/19/18
    Objective: To explain how the Rambam could view Maariv as optional even though he said it was obligatory.
    Quick summary: Reb Chaim answers a stira in Rambams by about Maariv being obligatory by saying that the Rambam holds that the tefilla itself remains optional, but there is an obligation on the person to say this optional tefilla.
    Mareh makom: http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=39831&st=&pgnum=8

    Full Summary:
    A. The Rambam says (Ch. 10 halacha 5 in hilchos tefila) that if you started davening Shacharis or Mincha and realized you said it already, you stop even in the middle of the tefilla. But if you started saying maariv and realized you said it already, you can continue.
    B. The Rambam explains that this is because you were already saying maariv as an optional donation tefilla (tefillas nedava), and now you can continue saying it as an “optional donation” tefilla. However, shacharis and mincha were being said as obligatory prayers and can’t be switched to optional donation prayers. They are different types of prayers.
    C. The Raavad cryptically says, ”There is no pleasing spirit from this statement of the Rambam”.
    The Kesef Mishna interprets the Raavad as arguing on the last of the 3 cases of the Rambam. Even if you started maariv and realized you said it already, you need to stop. This is because everyone has accepted maariv as obligatory, so it can’t be switched to a tefillas nedavah.
    (Not explained in Reb Chaim but interpolated from his piece) Reb Chaim finds the question of the Raavad as per the kesef Mishna compelling. To begin with, the poskim agree that nowadays it’s mandatory. Secondly, the Rambam himself says in Ch. 1 of Tefillas arvis that it’s been accepted as an obligation. So how could he call it optional here?

    Reb Chaim answers that The Rambam holds that the tefilla itself remains optional. But there’s an obligation on the person to say this optional tefilla.
    A. Reb Chaim then goes on to explain that the Rambam that calls it an obligation says they accepted it “like” an obligation, but not as an actual obligation. This is in contrast to the Rif who says it was accepted “to be” an obligation.
    B. Reb Chaim then quotes a Rambam in chapter 3 of hilchos tefila which calls Maariv optional as well. So now all Rambams are explained.
    (This hemshech is Reb Chaim clarifying the true opinion of the Raavad based on cheshbon, and isn’t necessary for understanding the first part which is based on svara.)
    Reb Chaim now says that true pshat in the Raavad is that the Raavad agrees to the third case of the Rambam and argues on the first two. In other words, the Raavad holds that you can combine a tefillas chov and a tefillas nedava without a problem, even by shacharis and mincha. This disagrees with the Kesef Mishna, who said that the Raavad holds that you can never continue davening if you made a mistake. Reb Chaim will go through the gemara and rishonim and prove this from cheshbon.
    The gemara in Brachos 21A has 3 relevant statements of Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Shmuel:
    A. If you’re not sure if you davened or not, you don’t daven. On this statement Rabbi Yochanan says “If only a person would daven the whole day”. Is he arguing?
    B. If you started davening and remembered you davened already, you stop davening.
    C. If you already davened and walk into a shul and they’re davening, you can daven a tefillas nedava if you can add something to the tefilla to change it from a regular tefilla.
    The question is, Is Rabbi Yochanan in fact arguing on Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Shmuel? And if yes, in which of these 3 cases? Just in the case where he spoke up, or in all 3 cases?
    A. Opinion of Rashi based on the Bahag- they are arguing everywhere. Rabbi Yochanan holds you don’t need to add on anything, can continue davening if you remembered in the middle, and for sure in a safeik hispallel case you can continue davening. We pasken like Rabbi Yochanan for the case of safeik hispallel (case A) and like Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Shmuel if you definitely davened and for saying a tefillas nedava (Case C).
    B. Opinion of Rif- Rabbi Yochanan meant to daven all day if you could add on something, like Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Shmuel in case C. Otherwise he would totally agree that you shouldn’t daven again. In other words, he agrees completely to Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Shmuel.
    C. Rambam says that these additional tefillos are like bringing an optional donation korban, and are only allowed if you can add on something. So the Rambam explicitly ties adding on something to the fact that it’s tefillas nedava. The very nature of a tefillas nedava requires adding something to it, and it’s thus fundamentally different from a tefillas chov.
    D. Raavad argues on Rambam there and says even if you don’t add on anything. This indicates that 1. Rabbi Yochanan, when he says “if only a person can daven the whole day”, is in fact arguing on Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Shmuel on all 3 cases, like Rashi says.
    2. Unlike Rashi, the Raavad paskens like Rabbi Yochanan on all 3. You don’t need to add anything.
    Reb Chaim then goes on to explain. Once there is no requirement of adding on to a tefillas nedava, then there is no fundamental difference between a tefillas nedava and a tefillas chov. So no reason to say that if you started as a tefillas chov and realized you davened already you should stop. A tefillas chov and tefillas nedava are exactly the same thing according to the Raavad. Therefore, the Raavad is disagreeing completely on the Rambam. Even by shacharis and mincha, if you started davening thinking you didn’t daven yet and realized you davened, you can continue davening as a tefillas nedava.

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.