Monday, November 15, 2010

tefilas arvis reshus

Ya’akov’s tefilah at the opening of VaYeitzei marks the institution of tefilas arvis. The gemara (Brachos 27) writes that tefilas arvis reshus, as opposed to shacharis and mincha, which are real chiyuvim. The gemara does not mean that one can arbitrarily skip ma’ariv – what the gemara means is that if a person is engaged in some other mitzvah, that other mitzvah takes precedence over ma’ariv (Tosfos; see R’ Chaim al HaRambam, Hil Tefilah, for a different approach). Many poskim write that since we now all customarily daven ma’ariv, it is no longer treated as reshus, but has the same status as other tefilos.

Why is ma’ariv considered a tefilas reshus? Some suggest that Ya’akov was caught offguard by the sudden setting of the sun. His tefilah was unplanned (he may have in fact been intending to daven mincha – see Divrei Shaul of R’ Yosef Shaul Nathanson) and not formalized in the same was as shacharis and mincha.

Since ma’ariv is reshus, poskim write that even women who daven shacharis and mincha may skip it. Although men have accepted upon themselves to treat ma'ariv as obligatory, women have not. (Howoever, it’s worth noting that Rabeinu Yonah in his Sha’arei Teshuvah does make reference to women davening three tefilos a day.)

An interesting exception to the rule: the Sha’arei Teshuvah (on Shulchan Aruch, citing Mor u’Ketziya) writes that ma’ariv on Shabbos and Yom Tov is not a reshus, but is a chiyuv. The logic is that ma’ariv on Shabbos and Yom Tov serves a dual-function: it is a kiyum mitzvah of tefilah, but it is also a kiyum mitzvah of being mekadesh Shabbos or Y”T (R’ Yonasan Shteif). It follows that women must also daven ma'ariv on these nights.

Practically speaking, this helps resolves another halachic difficulty. The Magen Avraham writes that a man is yotzei his mitzvah of kiddush d’oraysa when he davens ma’ariv. Asks the Dagul m’Revava: if so, how can he say kiddush for his wife and be motzi her? Her chiyuv kiddush is d’oraysa, his is only derabbanan – you can only be motzi someone if both parties share the same level of chiyuv? If one’s wife or daughter also davens ma’ariv, fulfilling her d’oraysa of kiddush, this question is moot.

8 comments:

  1. > Why is ma’ariv considered a tefilas reshus?

    My understanding was that while we learn that one should pray three times a day from the Avos, the idea of two fixed prayers comes from the two daily sacrifices with Maariv corresponding to the burning of the leftovers on the altar overnight.

    Does to Dagul m'Revava give an answer to the question? Might it be similar to a man blowing shofar over and over for different groups even though he's already heard enough himself?

    ReplyDelete
  2. The gemara has 2 sources for the takanah of tefilah: 1) kneged korbanos 2) tefilos avos tiknum. You are merging the two.

    I can't remember if the DG"M answers the question, but there are many answers given.

    ReplyDelete
  3. anon13:09 PM

    Chaim -- this merger of avos and keneged korbanos tiknum seems to have some basis in the Rambam where in hilchos tefilah he "paskens" keneged temidin tiknum but in end of hilchos melachim in his recording of the history of mitzvos from the 7 mitzvos benei noach until matan torah, he records how the avos davenned shacharis, minch and maariv respectively

    ReplyDelete
  4. Pashut pshat in the gemara is not that way. If you can say that arvis is reshus because, even though avos tiknum, the geder of the chiyuv is defined by korbanos, then why can't you say that the same sevara by zmanei tefilah? Avos tiknum, but when to daven depends on korbanos. Yet, the gemara doesn't read that way (certainly it doesn't fit Tos.)

    Either way, there is something that needs explaining here.

    ReplyDelete
  5. anon19:13 AM

    I agree that it is not the pashut pshat but the Rambam does seem to go the root of some synthesis of the two shitos in the gemara. It's been a while since I looked at the sugya but I have some recollection that there is a shitah mekubetzes in the sugya that works with this premise as well. If I remember I will take a look.

    ReplyDelete
  6. anon19:13 AM

    I agree that it is not the pashut pshat but the Rambam does seem to go the root of some synthesis of the two shitos in the gemara. It's been a while since I looked at the sugya but I have some recollection that there is a shitah mekubetzes in the sugya that works with this premise as well. If I remember I will take a look.

    ReplyDelete
  7. See Shiurim l'Zecher Aba Mori vol 2 page 204.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks! bli neder will check it out

    ReplyDelete