All right, rabotai (gentlemen), we’re learning the laws of Atah Chonantanu (You have graciously given us). Yesterday we got involved in siman (section) what? Resh-tzadi-dalet. Resh-tzadi-dalet. Tzadi-dalet. The minhag (custom) for Tzidkatcha (Your righteousness): I never heard the discussion about standing or sitting. Sitting. The minhag of Chabad was to sit during Tzidkatcha. Chacham Baruch used to stand too. Yes, Chacham Baruch used to stand, but according to the kavanot (intentions), the minhag of Jerusalem was to stand for Yoshev Beseter (He who dwells in shelter). We didn’t read it yet. Based on the kavanot, that minhag was to stand. We haven’t checked the text yet to see whether it’s the Bach. Yes, we have to see that too.
Let’s start with Aruch Hashulchan, say, se’if (paragraph) chet. “Since the reason that one does not repeat the prayer when he erred and did not make havdalah (separation) is that he can make havdalah over a cup, however, if he has no cup at night and thinks that he will not have a cup tomorrow either, he must go back and pray. Even though the time for havdalah is three days, as he wrote in se’if resh-tzadi-tet, nevertheless, will he fast for three days? That is, even if he will have a cup tomorrow, but he wants to eat, it is obvious that he must go back and mention havdalah in the prayer. Rather, ordinarily, by tomorrow he can decide not to eat. And on Tish’ah Be’Av (Ninth of Av) that falls on Sunday, if he forgot Atah Chonantanu, he does not have to go back and pray, since he will make havdalah after the fast.”
So he says the halachah (Jewish law) is this: What’s the reason you don’t go back when you missed Atah Chonantanu? It’s because you’re going to make havdalah al hakos (Havdalah over a cup). But let’s say you’re not going to have havdalah. You don’t have a kos (cup). What’s the din (law)? You’re going to have to repeat the Amidah. Follow the logic: The only reason you don’t repeat the Amidah is that in two minutes you’re going to make havdalah over the cup anyway. But let’s say you’re in a place where there’s no cup—the guy is in a hotel somewhere with non-Jews, and there’s no kosher wine, no kosher anything. He can’t make havdalah, and he forgot Atah Chonantanu. Lich’orah (seemingly), he’ll have to repeat it.
“But you can make havdalah until Tuesday.” That’s as long as you haven’t eaten. It doesn’t make sense to say the guy is going to starve until Tuesday. Maybe he’ll be able to make havdalah on Sunday, one day later, fine, but not three days later. Baruch Hamavdil (Blessed is He who separates holy from ordinary) won’t work. No, you need to say either Atah Chonantanu or havdalah al hakos. “Even though the time for havdalah is three days, nevertheless, will he fast for three days?” Interesting. It comes out that if you’re not fasting, then you can’t make havdalah. Once you’ve eaten, you can’t make havdalah, as we learned yesterday, because you ate before havdalah. And in any case, you have to repeat the Amidah.
“That is, even if he will have a cup tomorrow, but he wants to eat, it is obvious that he must go back and mention havdalah in the prayer.” Open up the Shulchan Aruch, rabotai. It’s in resh-tzadi-dalet, halachah (law) bet. It says: “If he erred and did not make havdalah in the prayer, and he has no cup at night, and thinks he will not have one tomorrow either, he must go back and pray.” That’s it. Nothing to talk about, rabotai. Straight-up halachah.
It continues: “If Tish’ah Be’Av falls on a Sunday, and he erred and did not make havdalah in the prayer, he does not have to go back and pray, since he makes havdalah over a cup at the conclusion of Tish’ah Be’Av.” Fantastic.
Continue reading the Aruch Hashulchan: “The Tur wrote: Where he has a cup, he does not have to go back and pray. As soon as he finishes the berachah (blessing), he should not go back, even though…” That means once you’ve said, “Baruch Atah Hashem, Chonen Hada’at,” don’t go back. I’m still in the Amidah, though. Maybe it means don’t go back if you’ve finished the Amidah, but if you’re still in the Amidah, should you go back? No, no. Once you’ve said “Baruch Atah Hashem, Chonen Hada’at,” you’re done. Can you add it in Shema Koleinu or anywhere else? No.
“Even though he did not begin the next berachah, Hashiveinu…”—Hashiveinu (Return us, our Father, to Your Torah). I might have thought you could go back or put it in there. No. “And Rabbi Elchanan wrote: As long as he did not begin the next berachah, he goes back.” Aha! That’s what this rabbi said: chozer (he goes back). As long as you haven’t started the next berachah, Hashiveinu, go back to Atah Chonen (You graciously grant knowledge).
“And so too with all things for which one does not have to go back, such as Al Hanisim (For the miracles)…” Right. This rabbi holds that as long as you haven’t started the next berachah, you can still go back. It’s still considered that you’re in Atah Chonen. Other rabbis said no. The explanation is that Rabbi Elchanan holds that as long as one has not started the next berachah, it is not considered going back; it is as if he is still in the middle of the previous berachah. Interesting reasoning: as long as you haven’t started the next berachah, you’re still on the previous berachah, so you can go back; it isn’t considered going back, because you’re still there.
But yesterday we saw the case of someone who accidentally said Barech Aleinu (Bless us) instead of Barechenu. I’m not talking about halachah lema’aseh (practical law); I’m talking about what this rabbi holds. This rabbi holds that way. We don’t follow him in practice. Rabbenu haBeit Yosef ruled in se’if dalet like the Tur: you don’t go back. Right, he rules simply like the Tur, who says you don’t go back. Even if you finished the berachah and remembered before starting the next one, it doesn’t matter.
“However, before he finishes the berachah, if he has not yet said Hashem—even if he said ‘Baruch Atah’—he goes back and says Atah Chonantanu.” That’s fair, because he hadn’t said “Baruch Atah Hashem.” Remember that point; we’ll come back to it.
“One should not ask: If so, why did we rule in siman kuf-yud-dalet, regarding Mashiv Haruach (Who makes the wind blow and the rain fall), that if he forgot it, as long as he has not begun Atah Kadosh, he says it there?” Over there, the person forgot Mashiv Haruach umorid hagashem, and said, “Baruch Atah Hashem, Mechayeh Hametim.” As long as he hadn’t said the words “Atah Kadosh,” they let him go back and say Mashiv Haruach there. Why? I thought you ruled that once you finish the berachah, it’s done.
“Certainly, the cases are not comparable. In a matter that one is obligated to go back for, it is not an interruption.” Over there, there was a chiyuv (obligation) to say it. You have to say Mashiv Haruach umorid hagashem, so there’s a problem. “That is not the case with Atah Chonantanu,” which is not mandatory. Are we going to make you create a hefsek (interruption) in between? Doesn’t Morid Hatal (Who brings down the dew) cover Mashiv Haruach? Ashkenazim don’t say Morid Hatal. They don’t have one or the other: Mashiv Haruach umorid hagashem or nothing. So they didn’t say anything. Maybe for us this might be different. Yes, for us we don’t have to say Mashiv Haruach, and if you said Morid Hatal, you’ve fulfilled your obligation.
“However, here, where there is no obligation, it is an interruption. Accordingly, if he has no cup, even here he says it after he has finished the berachah. Moreover, if he has no cup and remembers before the berachah of Shome’a Tefillah (He who hears prayer), he can say it in Shome’a Tefillah.” Very good. According to this, if you don’t have a cup, the din is that you have to repeat the Amidah. So you would have to go back and say Atah Chonantanu. If you have a cup, you never go back; bedi’avad (after the fact), you’re covered. If you don’t have a cup, and I caught myself after “Baruch Atah Hashem, Chonen Hada’at,” of course I would go back, because you have to go back anyway. I would go back anyway.
But the chiddush (novel point) is that if you remembered before Shome’a Tefillah, you could put it into Shome’a Tefillah as well. Exactly, because you have a chiyuv. Then he says that as long as you remembered before Shome’a Tefillah, you can say it there too.
“It seems to me that although one does not have to go back and pray if he forgot Atah Chonantanu, he should not say it in Shome’a Tefillah if he has a cup, because it is an interruption.” Don’t be a hero and put it into Shema Kolenu in a regular case. If you forgot Atah Chonantanu and you’re going to make havdalah in two minutes, don’t say, “Let me say it anyway in Shema Kolenu.” There’s no reason to say it there. “However, after Yihyu Leratzon (May the words of my mouth be acceptable), he should say it.” Ah, but after Yihyu Leratzon, before Oseh Shalom (He who makes peace), you should say Atah Chonantanu. After the prayer, an interruption doesn’t apply, and it’s no worse than someone who is accustomed to saying supplications. Yes, it’s no worse than Elokai Netzor (My God, guard my tongue) and all those other prayers that you’re making.
“Since there is no berachah here, what difference does it make? We hold that one may do work once he says ‘Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol’ (Blessed is He who separates holy from ordinary), even without a berachah, as was explained in siman resh-tzadi-tet.” Right. You’ll say, “There’s no berachah here; what difference does it make?” We hold that one may do work once he says Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol. Exactly: you don’t need to say a berachah to do work. If you said Baruch Hamavdil, you can do work. What do you gain by saying Atah Chonantanu if you want to do work? Who says you have to say a berachah to do work? Baruch Hamavdil is enough. So Atah Chonantanu is enough.
“The reason the authorities did not mention this is that it is obvious. This is not the enactment of the Sages to mention havdalah in the prayer; it is not havdalah in the prayer, since it is after the prayer.” Don’t think that because you put it at the end of Yihyu Leratzon, it counts as having said Atah Chonantanu in the prayer. You said it to make havdalah, and that’s it. That’s exactly the point: the nafka minah (practical difference) is if you ate at that point. Even though you said havdalah, you said it in the wrong place.
“There is a proof from our subject in siman tav-kuf-samech-heh, where they ruled that if one did not say Anenu in Shome’a Tefillah, he should say it after the prayer.” Over there, similarly, regarding Anenu or one of those things, if you didn’t say it in Shome’a Tefillah, you can say it after the Amidah. Hachi nami hacha (so too here). “One should not say that this is because, in the case of Anenu, there is a fast…habekan nami yesh Avinu Malkenu, hachel aleinu yamim, vachashuchin mikol chet.” Bottom line, it’s not going to be a hefsek.
The Tur also wrote that Rabbenu Tam holds that even if one began the next berachah, he may go back if he wants. Wow. According to Rabbenu Tam, even if you began the next berachah, Hashiveinu Avinu, you go back. Rabbi Elchanan’s shittah (position) was that you could go back only as long as you hadn’t started the next berachah. Rabbenu Tam says that even if you did start the next berachah, you go back if you want.
He explains that according to Rabbenu Tam, in all matters where the Sages said one does not need to go back, nevertheless, if he wants to go back, he may, as long as he has not completed his prayer. Wow, Rabbenu Tam was more lenient. He said that as long as you haven’t finished your prayer and you’re still in the Amidah, go back if you want. He did so himself, as Tosafot wrote at the end of the chapter Tefilat haShachar.
The Rosh disagrees with him. Since, in principle, one does not go back, the same applies once he has finished the berachah. Basically, the Rosh’s opinion is like ours: once you’re dealing with something that isn’t a deal breaker for the Amidah, you never go back for it.
Rabbenu haBeit Yosef wrote in se’if heh: “In a place where they said that one does not go back to pray, if he wants to be stringent with himself and go back after he has completed his prayer, he may. But if he has not yet completed his prayer, he may not go back.” His intention is that he rules like the Rosh: one may not go back once he has finished the berachah. Actually, he says that after completing his prayer, one can be stringent and go back by praying as a tefilat nedavah (voluntary prayer).
So Maran says that for something that isn’t mandatory, if you haven’t finished the berachah, of course you go back. But if you’ve already finished the berachah, you don’t go back. If you want to pray a tefilat nedavah, you can. What, finish the whole thing and then pray again? Finish the whole thing, then pray another Amidah. He isn’t saying you have to go back. He’s saying to pray a tefilat nedavah.
But when you go back and say that in nedavah, is that considered saying Atah Chonantanu? No, and it's not mistemah, mistemah. Otherwise, what, you kenas a guy, chas veshalom, who did the right thing? I mean, he prayed a nedavah. His main intention is that this is the opposite of Rabbenu Tam’s reasoning. Rabbenu Tam says that in the middle of the prayer one may go back, but after completing it one may not; according to him, in the middle one can go back if he wants. Maran says the opposite: in the middle of the Amidah, one may not go back. After the Amidah, if he wants to pray a voluntary prayer, he may. Obviously, even according to Rabbenu Tam, if one completed his prayer and wants to pray a voluntary prayer, who would stop him? Rabbenu Tam does not say that it is forbidden to pray nedavah. So what is his chiddush? If a person wants to pray a tefilat nedavah for Atah Chonantanu, he may.
“Some say that if one forgot to pray Ma’ariv on Saturday night, he prays Shacharit twice.” We saw this yesterday. If you forgot to pray Arvit on Saturday night, you have to pray Shacharit twice. In which Amidah are you going to say Atah Chonantanu? It’s already lost. In the second one? It’s lost, exactly. You can’t say Atah Chonantanu in Shacharit. It says: “He should not say Atah Chonantanu in the make-up prayer.” There is no Atah Chonantanu on Sunday morning.
“There is one who disagrees, since in Ma’ariv there was an obligation to mention it, and the original enactment in the Gemara was that havdalah be said only in the prayer, and even now its primary enactment is in the prayer; therefore, one must mention it.” Wow. Some say that on Sunday morning, in the first Amidah you pray the regular prayer, and in the second Amidah, for tashlumin (make-up prayer), you say Atah Chonantanu. What if they didn’t make havdalah at all?
“The primary ruling is like the first opinion. Certainly, if he had no cup, he is obligated to mention it, in order to fulfill the obligation of havdalah in the prayer. But if he had a cup and fulfilled the obligation of havdalah, even though when he prays afterward he should mention it, when he prays the next day, it is like one who did not pray Minchah on Friday afternoon.” That person prays Arvit twice, as written in siman kuf-chet, and here too, “u-ve-yom alecha havdalah, ve-chovat havdalah alecha kvar yatza.” Let’s see what reasoning he’s making.
The primary opinion says you don’t say Atah Chonantanu. Certainly, if a person had no cup and didn’t pray Arvit, he is obligated to mention Atah Chonantanu in order to fulfill the obligation of havdalah in the prayer. He has to mention it because he has a chiyuv. But if he had a cup, he fulfilled the obligation of havdalah. Even if he had a cup and made havdalah first, then prayed, nevertheless, when praying the next day, it is like someone who didn’t pray Minchah on Friday afternoon and prays Arvit twice for Shabbat, as written in siman kuf-chet. He’s saying that if the person made havdalah, then perhaps, when praying that night, he was still obligated to say Atah Chonantanu. But if he is praying the next day, there is no chiyuv of Atah Chonantanu, so he prays two regular Amidot. We’ll have to see that in siman kuf-chet, but we won’t open it now.
Open the text of Maran and read halachah dalet and heh: “In a place where they said that one does not go back to pray, as soon as he finishes the berachah he must not go back, even though he has not begun the next berachah.” So he does not rule like Rabbi Elchanan. He rules like the Rosh. Once you’ve finished the berachah—“Baruch Atah Hashem,” finished Chonen Hada’at—that’s it. Have a good day.
“In a place where they said that one does not go back, if he wants to be stringent with himself and go back after completing his prayer, he may.” Ein tzarich lachazor here. Ah, you don't have it in your text? Ah, so you don't have the word lachazor. Okay, he put still as lachazor. Imagine that. If he wants to go back after the Amidah, he can. What does “go back” mean? Pray a nedavah. That’s what the Mishnah Berurah says: betorat nedavah. He finished the Amidah; he can pray another one. The Mishnah Berurah says nedavah. If he has not yet completed his prayer, he may not, because that would be a hefsek. Interesting: Maran holds that you can pray a tefilat nedavah for havdalah, for Atah Chonantanu, but you wouldn’t go back in the middle of the Amidah. That would be a hefsek. It’s better to pray a nedavah, which is fine, than to have a hefsek in the Amidah. You can always pray nedavah.
Now let’s see what chiddushim (novel points) Chacham Ovadia and Chacham Ben Tzion say. First, Chesed La-Alafim, Rabbi Papo. Bring Chacham Ben Tzion here. We’ll see a couple of cases. What is the practical halachah? Resh-tzadi-dalet. “Even on Tish’ah Be’Av that falls on Sunday, if he did not make havdalah in his prayer,” and forgot Atah Chonantanu, no problem, “since he makes havdalah over a cup at the conclusion of Tish’ah Be’Av. He should only say Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol.” Of course, because he wants to do work. On Saturday night you want to do work, so if you didn’t say it, you have to say Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol.
This comes from resh-tzadi-heh. Let’s see what Chacham says. It works regarding work, but it doesn’t work regarding… Baruch Hamavdil? Well, on Tish’ah Be’Av, no. That’s why the person didn’t say anything. What if he wants to drive or turn on the lights on Tish’ah Be’Av? That’s a problem. We haven’t seen that Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol solves everything. We’ll see. You have to say something to end Shabbat, or else he’s in violation of “Thou shalt keep the Sabbath holy,” the Fourth Commandment. What else is he in violation of? I don’t know. Statute number four of the Ten Commandments.
Now we’re in resh-tzadi-dalet. Sal, find the Ben Ish Chai, parashat Vayetze, second year, se’if heh. What does the Ben Ish Chai say? “In a place where most people are amei ha’aretz (ignorant of Jewish law), and they do not know how to say Atah Chonantanu by heart, it is a mitzvah (commandment) for the prayer leader to say all of Atah Chonantanu aloud, so they will say it with him or concentrate on his recitation. See Kaf HaChaim, siman lamed-tet, ot tet, and see there.”
So, in those days, I guess they didn’t have siddurim (prayer books), and not everybody knew Atah Chonantanu by heart. If you didn’t know it by heart, the custom was for the chazan (prayer leader) to say it out loud. That’s very interesting. He says either let them say it along with the chazan or let them listen—shome’a ke’oneh (hearing is like answering). What, in the middle of the chazan’s Amidah, would he start saying it out loud? Right, and everybody would wait, like on Mussaf of the holidays, when they wait for the shofar for the chazan. They would wait at Atah Chonen. Today we don’t do that because we have siddurim, but they call out “Atah Chonantanu!” to remind the people.
What do the highlighters do, then? The guy who calls out “Atah Chonantanu.” That’s all they do: a reminder. Today it’s proper to remind the people. They remind them right away; I don’t know how they get there so fast. “The pylons.” The pylons, yes. They’re right; everybody wants to be the guy. What should I tell you? Leshem shamayim (for the sake of Heaven). Somebody always gets saved.
Shulchan Shlomo wrote about a person who mentioned Atah Chonantanu in the prayer but made a mistake in something that requires him to go back. This is a big one. What would you say in this case, rabotai? The person prayed the Amidah and said Atah Chonantanu, but by mistake, in the winter, he didn’t say Barech Aleinu. Now he has to repeat the Amidah. Does he have to say Atah Chonantanu in the second Amidah, or is it considered that he already said it? Or do you say that since his Amidah was disqualified, he didn’t say it? Are they going to impose all these penalties now? The guy said Atah Chonantanu. It’s voided? He made havdalah. Is it voided, meaning it doesn’t count as havdalah and he can do work? Does it depend on Atah Chonantanu too? He said the words Atah Chonantanu. It’s two sides of the question: can he do work?
When he said Atah Chonantanu, his Amidah was still valid. Correct. He said the words. Shulchan Shlomo writes: “Regarding a person who mentioned Atah Chonantanu in the prayer but erred in a matter that requires him to go back, such as veten tal umatar livrachah (Grant dew and rain for blessing), it is possible that he is not obligated to mention Atah Chonantanu when he repeats his prayer, since as soon as he says Atah Chonantanu, he has already been permitted to do work.” It worked.
What do we see? All this discussion may help: Atah Chonantanu worked as much as it could. It doesn’t make sense that now, because he forgot tal umatar, he goes back to being prohibited. You’re going to tell me that because he forgot veten tal umatar livrachah, that invalidates the Atah Chonantanu he said? As David just said, when I said Atah Chonantanu, did it work? Right now, in the middle of the Amidah, can I technically turn on the light? Yes. Now you’re going to tell me that when I missed veten tal umatar, retroactively I can’t turn on the light again?
But what do you lose by saying it again? That’s the problem—why make such a big deal over it? What do I lose? I lose the answer to this question: after that Amidah, can I do work right now? Why not say it again to cover yourself? I want to know if I can do work. No, maybe it’s a hefsek, now that I’ve already said it. Wait a second. What do we consider an Amidah in which a person made a mistake and had to go back? Is what he said a tefillah or not? It’s not a tefillah. So then I said Atah Chonantanu. You’re right, but I didn’t say those words? I did say Atah Chonantanu.
Is it worse than if a person said Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol before the Amidah? Does that work? Here’s the case: he said Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol, then walked in. It’s time. I haven’t prayed Arvit yet; I’m the shamash (synagogue attendant) of the shul, running around cleaning up Se’udah Shelishit (third meal). They tell me, “Sam, light the havdalah candle.” I haven’t prayed Arvit yet, but I said Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol. Why is this person worse? He prayed the Amidah. Okay, that Amidah didn’t count, but he said Atah Chonantanu, and when he said it, it did something. Is it pending? So that person would say Atah Chonantanu? Maybe the shamash wouldn’t say it because he hadn’t prayed. No, it could be that here the Rabbis instituted that it be said properly in the Amidah. Once they instituted it, I said it here. And when I said it, it was good. Back and forth.
He also wrote about someone who came late to the synagogue on Saturday night and arrived just before the Amidah. The din is that he jumps straight into the Amidah with the congregation. “It is clear that he must say havdalah in the prayer.” Of course he has to say havdalah. “We do not say that, since the recitation of Shema is more frequent than havdalah, he should not say havdalah before Shema.” You might say not to say havdalah because Shema is more frequent and he hasn’t yet said Shema. But that is what he is supposed to say, since the Rabbis instituted it as part of the prayer.
Now we need Or LeTziyon, perek chaf-bet, yud-bet. It comes out that Shulchan Shlomo says it is possible one is not obligated to mention Atah Chonantanu then. That’s Rav Shlomo Zalman, no? He leans toward saying you don’t have to say Atah Chonantanu. “Since you mentioned Shema, on Saturday night, do you still have to repeat it?” Yes, usually you’re saying it before forty minutes. That’s right.
“If he forgot Chonen and did not make havdalah on Saturday night, until when can he make havdalah?” Famous question. He forgot and didn’t make havdalah—until when can he make havdalah? On the bottom, he discusses another question. Remember, rabotai, we learned that if a person ate after the Amidah and had not said Atah Chonantanu, they penalize him by making him pray again. How much is eating? What does it mean that he ate? A kezayit (an olive-sized amount). Less than a kezayit, we’re not going to penalize him. So the person had one ka’ach; is that a problem? No, it’s okay.
Chacham Ben Tzion says: “Regarding the law of tasting, one must consider what the measure is: any amount, or a kezayit of food and a revi’it (a quarter-log) of drink. In practice, it appears that he does not go back and pray unless he tasted a kezayit of food or a revi’it of drink.” So the telephone is right. Wow. Here’s another question from Chacham Ben Tzion. Suppose someone prayed the Amidah, picked up a piece of cake, said “Baruch Atah Hashem, borei minei mezonot,” and then remembered. Should he taste it? Taste it and then pray nineteen berachot again? No, because it’s less than a kezayit. Put a crumb in your mouth.
He also writes: “It appears that someone who erred and forgot Atah Chonantanu in the prayer, and made a berachah over food before havdalah, should not taste it, because then he will have to go back and pray. Rather, he should say Baruch shem kevod malchuto l’olam va’ed (Blessed is the name of His glorious kingdom forever).” But why? You just told me a kezayit. Because it’s a doubt. In practice he says a kezayit, but it’s still a safek (doubt). If you taste it, you put yourself in a doubt that you might have to pray nineteen berachot. Why take that risk? His point is that if you don’t eat, you at least have one berachah, but if you taste it, you might have to go back and say nineteen berachot. You’d rather forgo the one berachah than say the nineteen.
Let’s see if Chacham Ovadia says anything different. What did we just say? If a person prayed the Amidah without Atah Chonantanu, and afterward said Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol, will he have to repeat the Amidah? He says, of course. Baruch Hamavdil only allows you to do work, but you still have to say Atah Chonantanu. Don’t think that because you said Baruch Hamavdil, it exempts you from Atah Chonantanu. “The recitation of Hamavdil helps only regarding permission to do work,” writes Kaf HaChaim.
Now, Or LeTziyon. Chacham Ben Tzion has a chiddush. Suppose the person was sick. He prayed the Amidah on Saturday night, forgot Atah Chonantanu, and was sick at home, praying alone. They gave him his medicine, and he drank a revi’it of water. Chacham Ben Tzion says that since the whole reason is a penalty, we don’t penalize a sick person. The same applies to an onen (a mourner before burial). Leave aside the medicine; he drank because he was thirsty. The point is that he drank. According to this, if you drank a revi’it, you’re stuck—but not in the case of a sick person or an onen. Suppose the person prayed the Arvit Amidah early, as we learned, forgot Atah Chonantanu, and then ate. We won’t make this decree in the case of an onen either, because the person is not responsible. What do you want from him? That’s that chiddush.
He has another chiddush in Chelek Alef, siman kaf-bet, Orach Chayim kaf-bet. The case is: “He erred and did not make havdalah in the prayer, and then erred again and did work before havdalah.” He did work before havdalah, not eating. We said that eating before havdalah means you have to pray again. What about doing work before havdalah—does he repeat the prayer or not?
The response: Maran ruled in siman resh-tzadi-dalet that someone who erred and did not make havdalah, and tasted before making havdalah over a cup, must go back and pray. Rabbi Akiva Eiger wrote there in the gloss, in the name of the Rashba, that the same law applies if he did work before havdalah. Eliyah Rabbah wrote the same, but qualified it: this is when he did not first say “Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol.” So he didn’t say Baruch Hamavdil, prayed the Amidah, and did work; he has to pray again. Why did Maran say that?
However, in practice, we do not follow the Rashba. The Shulchan Aruch says later: “If he needs to do work before making havdalah in the prayer, he says Baruch Hamavdil without a berachah and does the work.” That means if he says Baruch Hamavdil, it’s okay. He hadn’t prayed the Amidah, like the shamash we discussed. It is clear that he holds that a simple indication is sufficient regarding work, even if he did not make havdalah in the prayer.
Accordingly, even if he did not say Baruch Hamavdil at all and did work, he does not go back. Since it is not a berachah, but only an indication, whether he said it or not does not make a difference. Ideally, one should say it to accompany the king, but after the fact it certainly does not hold things up. Do you hear this? He is saying that the only reason we say Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol is to accompany the king. Ideally, say it, but if you didn’t say it, you’re okay. There’s your answer, Steve. According to Chacham Ben Tzion, you are not a transgressor of Shabbat. You didn’t make the indication and didn’t do what you were supposed to, but the time is the time. Wow.
That’s why Maran doesn’t tell you that if you did work, you have to go back. If you did work, Shabbat is technically over. What are you worried about? But if you ate, you shouldn’t eat before havdalah. Since, in principle, one may do work without havdalah, and Baruch Hamavdil is only required ideally, that’s a big chiddush from Chacham Ben Tzion. I’m going to underline it. Okay, it’s not my book. In my book I’d underline it. That’s for the next guy. We’ve gotten so used to remembering to say Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol. Of course, ideally you should say it, but if you didn’t, that’s what he says. That’s a big chiddush.
One more halachah: “If he forgot and ate on the conclusion of Tish’ah Be’Av”—Tish’ah Be’Av fell on a Sunday—the person ate on Saturday night and forgot it was Tish’ah Be’Av, before making havdalah over a cup. “It seems that after he has already prayed Arvit without mentioning Atah Chonantanu, there is no further place to mention havdalah in the prayer.” What is he talking about? “If he forgot and ate at the conclusion of Tish’ah Be’Av that fell on Sunday, before making havdalah over a cup, it seems that after he has already prayed Arvit without mentioning Atah Chonantanu, there is no further place to mention havdalah in the prayer.”
Kaf HaChaim cites the Radbaz, who wrote that if he remembers before beginning the next berachah, even though he has finished the berachah, he says it between one berachah and the next. It is not an interruption, since it is related to the berachah. But he writes that the position of Birkei Yosef is not so, and Maran’s ruling in this section—that as soon as one has finished the berachah, he does not go back—implies that he does not mention it at all. That is what Yalkut Yosef and Yechaveh Da’at write: whenever one does not go back, he is not permitted to say it between berachot. He adds that likewise he should not say it in Shome’a Tefillah. Wow, that answers another question. Don’t say it in Shome’a Tefillah. “A person says requests in Shome’a Tefillah.” But mentioning havdalah doesn’t belong there. You can say it in Elokai Netzor before the end of the Amidah. So don’t be a hero and put it into Shome’a Tefillah, according to these rabbis. That’s what Kaf HaChaim says. It doesn’t belong there. It’s not a prayer.
Do we have a minute for this? Yes. Bring siman kuf-chet, Chacham David’s book, Hilchot Tashlumin (Laws of make-up prayers), in Halachah Berurah. There are a lot of halachot. Thank you, Ned. Gorgeous. Interesting question: should a sick person who is permitted to eat on Tish’ah Be’Av that falls on Sunday make havdalah on Saturday night? Yes, sure. A sick person who is permitted to eat on Tish’ah Be’Av—should he make havdalah at the conclusion of Shabbat or wait until the congregation does it? He should make havdalah.
Let’s see whether he has this case. Chacham David. We’re getting warm. Here it is. “If he did not pray Arvit on Saturday night and came to pray Shacharit twice, he should not say Atah Chonantanu in the prayer at all.” There is no Atah Chonantanu on Sunday morning. “If he did not make havdalah over a cup on Saturday night, and certainly if he is not going to make havdalah, he should say Atah Chonantanu in the second prayer.” That makes sense. You slept through it, went to sleep at six o’clock, and woke up the next morning.
If he has a cup, no problem; he’ll make havdalah on Sunday morning if he slept. But after he prays, the first thing in front of him is Shacharit. As long as he’s going to make havdalah over a cup, he’s covered. But if he isn’t going to make havdalah over a cup for whatever reason, that’s an interesting case. Give me a case where you have to say Atah Chonantanu on Sunday morning. No wine. Let’s see the bottom: “If he wants to make havdalah in the first prayer, he has what to rely on.” He knows that the first Amidah is for Shacharit, but he wants to say Atah Chonantanu in the first Amidah. He has what to rely on, even though normally the make-up prayer is the second one.
Let’s see the bottom, rabotai. The Radbaz wrote in his responsa that if one did not pray Arvit on Saturday night and prays the make-up prayer on Sunday morning, he does not make havdalah in the prayer, even if he has not yet made havdalah over a cup, because they did not institute a make-up prayer for havdalah in the prayer. Uve’ur Halachah and several later authorities. However, the Magen Avraham rejected the Radbaz’s words and said that one must make havdalah in the prayer in every case. Wow. Several later authorities explain that the Magen Avraham means one must make havdalah in the make-up prayer.
Several later authorities also comment that even according to the Radbaz, it seems that the Magen Avraham’s question against him is not a question. In any case, see Matteh Yehudah, who writes that if he has no wine to make havdalah over a cup, even the Radbaz agrees that he makes havdalah in the make-up prayer for Arvit. Wow. If you have no cup, then you have to say Atah Chonantanu.
Ma’aseh Tzeror and Peri Adamah likewise write that if he made havdalah over a cup on Saturday night, he does not make havdalah in the prayer on Sunday. If he did not make havdalah over a cup, since he still has an obligation of havdalah over a cup, he makes havdalah in the make-up prayer. That’s like you, Steve: if you haven’t made havdalah yet, there’s still an obligation of Atah Chonantanu, and he has to make havdalah in Atah Chonantanu.
Petach HaDvir rejects the words of the Rav Shevut Ya’akov. Even according to the Radbaz’s understanding, where one did not make havdalah over a cup on Saturday night, he must make havdalah in the prayer on Sunday. Rabbi Akiva Eiger wanted to understand that you say it in the first prayer. Look at that. What’s the logic? I guess because you want to make Atah Chonantanu right away.
So, halachah lema’aseh regarding Atah Chonantanu: especially if the person made havdalah, for sure you’re not going to say it on Sunday. Or, if the person plans to make havdalah, Chacham David says you’re not going to say it either. If he is not going to make havdalah, then you say it. That’s a good trivia question: give me a case where you say Atah Chonantanu on Sunday morning. It has to be the perfect storm. The person didn’t pray on Saturday night and has no wine. He’s traveling, with no wine, and didn’t pray Arvit on Saturday night. Now make the case even more unusual: give me a case where he says Atah Chonantanu in Shacharit on Sunday morning. According to Rabbi Akiva Eiger, in the perfect storm—no havdalah on Saturday night, no way to make havdalah, and the person forgot to pray Arvit—he could say Atah Chonantanu in the first Amidah. Chacham David says you have what to rely on if you do that. That’s a special case.
Why is he doing that? The person wants to rely on Rabbi Akiva Eiger. The person is from Posen. Of course. He doesn’t have to; he already said it. Again, that’s only where he knows the first one is for Shacharit. That’s a special case. At least we have clarity on this. Anything else outstanding? We came out with Chacham Ben Tzion that if a person didn’t say Baruch Hamavdil bein kodesh lechol, it is okay bedi’avad to do work? Any other questions that we haven’t resolved? I think we’re good. We’ll stop here. Baruch Hashem le’olam amen ve’amen (Blessed is Hashem forever, amen and amen). Tevorchu mipi Elyon, thanks for coming.