Chapter 5: Answering Amen

1. Obligation to answer Amen:[1]
2. The greatness and the obligation:

It is an obligation to answer Amen towards the blessing said by a Jew.[2] This applies even if the person who hears the blessing is not obligated in this blessing at all.

• Example: During Shabbos lunch, Reuven recites the blessing over bread out loud at the table. Moishe and Chaya respond with a clear and timely “Amen,” fulfilling their obligation to acknowledge the blessing, even though Chaya is not eating bread herself.

The obligation to answer Amen to a Mi Shebeirach and to a blessing of a Jew:[3] Whenever one hears someone blessing a Jew [or praying for a certain matter[4]], it is a Mitzvah[5] for the listeners to answer Amen to his blessing [or prayer[6]]. [This applies to all people who hear the blessing, even if the blessing was intended for a specific individual.] It is for this reason that we answer Amen to the Harachamans said in Birchas Hamazon by the leader of the Zimun.[7] [This applies even though Hashem’s name is not mentioned in the blessing.[8] Thus, all those who hear a Mi Shebeirach said in Shul, or a personal blessing given by a friend such as by a Farbrengen and the like, are to answer Amen to the blessing.[9] Another example of this would be for a mourner to answer Amen towards the comforters parting remarks of consolement.[10] One is however not to answer Amen to a blessing which is said without Hashem’s name due to doubt, such as the blessing of Baruch Patrani Meonsho Shel Zeh.[11] If a gentile gives a Jew a blessing, one is not to answer Amen to his blessing unless he does not mention G-d’s name in the blessing[12], or he is known to be monotheistic, such as a Muslim.[13] If he does not mention G-d’s name in the blessing, then one is to answer Amen.[14]]

• Example: At shul, Sara hears Yosef give a Mi Shebeirach for someone recovering from illness. She answers “Amen,” as it is a mitzvah for all present to affirm the blessing, regardless of whether the prayer is directed at them.
• Example: After receiving a heartfelt Bracha for Parnasa from Shlomo at a friend’s farbrengen, Shira answers “Amen,” even though Hashem’s name was not mentioned, fulfilling the mitzvah of acknowledging a blessing given by a fellow Jew.

1. The meaning:[39]

The word Amen is an acronym for the words Keil Melech Neman, [which means that Hashem is a trustworthy king and will fulfill the blessing]. Amen is an expression of belief coming from the word Hamanas Devarim [i.e. Emuna].[40]

The intent of the Amen:[41] The intent that one is to have in mind upon answering Amen is that the blessing that the person said is true and I believe in this.[42] This intent however is only applicable by those blessings that are factual statements of Hashem’s greatness [such as Baruch Sheamar, Yishtabach, and Goal Yisrael[43]]. However, those statements that are a request and appeal towards Hashem, such as the stanzas of Kaddish [which is a request that Hashem return his Shechina] and the like, one is to intend on the future, that the words will come true and his requests will be speedily fulfilled.[44] Those statements that are both admiration and praise and also hope and anticipation that the words being said will be speedily fulfilled, it is proper to also intend in the Amen both interpretation; that the statement said is true and that his words will come true and it will be speedily fulfilled.[45] An example of such blessings are the middle blessings of Chazaras Hashatz, as well as the blessings of Ritzei and Sim Shalom.

1. Children answering Amen:[46]

One is to teach his young[47] children and educate them to answer Amen. From the moment that a child answers Amen he has a portion in the world to come.

• Example: Malkie, age five, recites the blessing on grape juice at the table. Her father, Avraham, listens and answers “Amen,” educating her in mitzvos and affirming her sincere blessing.

1. Towards whose blessing must one answer Amen?

Amen to blessing of if did not hear the entire blessing:[48] One is obligated to answer Amen even if one did not hear the entire blessing from beginning to end, but rater only its end. Furthermore, one is obligated to answer Amen even if he did not hear any words of the blessing from the person saying it, so long as he is aware of the identity of this blessing, [and is not intending to be Yotzei with it], in order so it not be an Amen Yesoma.[49]

Amen to blessing if person changed the dialect of the blessing:[50] If a person changed the dialect of a blessing one is not to answer Amen to his blessing. [Nevertheless, if the person is a G-d fearing Jew and changed the wording of the blessing unintentionally or due to lack of knowledge, some Poskim[51] rule one may answer Amen to his blessing.]

Amen to blessing of Gentiles that are not idolaters:[52] If a gentile[53] recited a blessing amongst one the blessings instituted by the Sages[54] one is to answer Amen if he heard the entire blessing from his mouth.[55] If however one did not hear the entire blessing from his mouth he may not answer Amen. Kutim have the same status as gentiles in this regard.

Amen to blessing of Idolaters and Heretics:[56] It is forbidden to answer Amen after the blessing after a heretic who is a fervent follower of idolatry. This applies even if one heard the entire blessing from his mouth.[57]  [The same applies towards the Apikorsim, such as Jews praying in a conservative or reform temple, that one may not answer Amen to their blessings.[58] However those non-religious Jews that are defined as a Tinok Shenishba one must answer Amen to their blessing.[59]]

Amen to blessing of children:[60] One is not to answer Amen for a blessing recited by children who are being taught the blessings by their teacher. This is despite the fact that it is permitted to teach the children the proper blessings even not during their appropriate time.[61] If however the children are not saying a blessing in vain, such as they are saying blessings at the appropriate time [such as over food], then one [must[62]] answer Amen to their blessings.[63] [One who does not answer Amen to a blessing is severely punished even if the blessing was said by a child.[64] This applies to both a male and female child.[65]]

Amen to blessings of practicing adults:[66] It is forbidden for adults to recite blessings outside of their appropriate time even if it is done out of learning, to teach them the blessings.[67] [Such a blessing is considered a blessing in vain and is certainly forbidden to answer Amen to such a blessing.]

Must one answer Amen to be Yotzei with another person’s blessing?[68] If one listened to the blessing but did not answer Amen, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation.

• Example: Dovid, who is not Jewish, recites a blessing in praise of the one God before a meal. If you hear the entire blessing, you may answer “Amen.”
• Example: You enter a room just as Miriam finishes “… Borei Pri Hagafen.” Knowing she is making the blessing over wine, you still answer “Amen.”
• Example: Shimon deliberately changes the traditional blessing formula. In this situation, you do not answer “Amen.”

1. Answering Amen to a blessing in vain:[69]

It is forbidden to answer Amen to a blessing that was said in vain. See Chapter 3 Halacha 3 for the full details of this matter!

May one answer Amen to a blessing that may not be said according to one’s opinion that he follows?[70] Some Poskim rule that one is not to answer Amen after a blessing that may not be said according to ones custom due to it being considered a Safek Bracha Levatala.[71] Rather, one is to answer Amen in his mind[72], [or say the verse of Baruch Hashem Leolam Amen Veamen making sure to conclude Amen as the person concludes his blessing[73]].

Table 1: Answering Amen in Different Situations

2. How to answer Amen:[96]

Answering Amen to a blessing contains a number of laws and restrictions. The proper answering of Amen is so severe that Ben Azaiy states in the Talmud that on one’s form of answer is dependent the longevity of his life.[97] These laws apply towards Amen after a blessing, or of Kaddish.[98]  [These laws however do not apply towards Amen of a blessing that does not include Hashem’s name, such as a Mi Shebeirach, or Harachaman, or a personal blessing given by a friend and the like.[99]]

1. The vowelization and timing-Amen Chatufa:[100]

One is not to answer an Amen Chatufa.[101]  This includes two regulations:

1. One is not to pronounce the Alef of the Amen with a Chataf Kamatz or Kamatz Chataf but rather with a Kamatz Gadol.[102] [One is likewise not to overemphasize the Mem of the word Amen as this causes the Nun to sound as if it has the vowelization of a Tzeirei.[103]]
2. One is not to hurry and answer Amen prior to the blessing being concluded.[104] [This includes the entire last word of the blessing, and thus one is not to answer Amen until it is concluded. This applies even if the Chazan is lengthening the concluding word of the blessing with a melody.[105]]

1. The pronunciation-Amen Ketufa:[106]

One is not to answer an Amen Ketufa.[107] This includes two regulations:

1. One is not to skip the Nun of the Amen. Skipping is defined as one that he does not verbalize it strongly enough to be recognizable.[108] [The same applies for the Alef of the Amen.]
2. One is not to split the Amen into two.[109]

• Example: Yosef rushes and says, “’Men” without pronouncing the initial Alef. This is incorrect and should be avoided.
• Example: Esther skips the final Nun, pronouncing only “Ame.” This incomplete Amen is improper.

1. The approximation-Amen Yesoma:[110]

One is not to answer an Amen Yesoma.[111] This includes two regulations:

1. Not to delay the Amen: One is not to delay the Amen. Rather, immediately upon the person concluding the blessing he is to answer Amen.[112] [The Amen must be answered within Kdei Dibbur of the conclusion of the blessing[113], which is approximately 2 seconds.[114]]

Chazan concludes Kaddish with melody:[115] If the Chazan is lengthening in melody the recital of the concluding words of Kaddish “Veimru Amen”, then if he is lengthening a lot the congregation is to recite the Amen immediately [upon him beginning the words Veimru].[116] [This applies for any blessing that concludes with the words Veimru Amen.[117]]

In proximity of Amen of a congregation:[118] If a blessing is said in public and the people hearing it answer Amen, then it is permitted to answer Amen so long as majority of the congregation has not yet finished their Amen, [and one knows which blessing was said, as will be explained in Halacha 2].[119] If however the majority of the listeners have already answered Amen then one may not answer Amen even if there is still a minority of people answering Amen.[120] However, there is an opinion[121] who rules that one may answer Amen immediately after the Amen of the congregation, even if the majority of the congregation (or even all the congregation) has already completed their Amen, and if he answers immediately afterwards it is considered as if he is answering Amen after the blessing.[122] Practically, it is all dependent on how close in proximity one’s start of his Amen is to the conclusion of the blessing. Thus, if he heard an individual answer Amen for another person’s blessing and he knows what blessing it is, he may answer Amen after the conclusion of the first Amen, if the first Amen was said without being lengthened. However, by a congregation, in general their Amen is lengthened and drawn-out as it is not possible for everyone to begin and end at the same exact time, and hence if majority of the congregation has answered it is usually too distanced from the concluding blessing for one to answer Amen. However in the event that the Amen of the majority or entire congregation was said quickly and hence its conclusion is in close proximity to the conclusion of the blessing, then one may still answer Amen.   

Kaddish/Kedusha and Barchu:[123] The same laws apply towards answering for Kaddish/Kedusha/Barchu, that so long as majority of the congregation has not yet completed their answering, one may still answer. This applies even if one did not hear the words of the Kaddish/Kedusha/Barchu of the Chazan, as will be explained in Halacha 2. (Furthermore, according to the latter opinion brought above, even if majority of the congregation has completed their recital, so long as there are still nine people remaining [who are still answering] it is permitted to answer.[124])

1. Not to answer an Amen if did not hear blessing: One is not to answer Amen to a blessing that one did not hear and does not know its identity, as will be explained next.

• Example: You pause for several seconds after hearing Bracha from Chava before responding “Amen.” This delay is not proper; Amen should be answered immediately.
• Answering Amen to a recording:[125] One may not answer Amen to a blessing said in a recording.[126]

1. The length-Amen Ketzara:[133]

One may not answer a short Amen.[134] This means that the Amen [may not be said quickly and rather] is to be slightly lengthened. It is to be lengthened to the amount of time it takes to say the words Keil Melech Neman.[135] One however is not to lengthen too much in the Amen, as the word is not expressed properly when it is over extended.

• Example: Leah replies “Amen” so quickly that it sounds clipped or abrupt. Instead, lengthen the word slightly, saying it calmly.

1. The loudness:[136]

One who answers Amen is not to lift his voice more than the person who said the blessing.[137] [However, if one is doing so in order to motivate the public to answer Amen, then it is permitted to raise one’s voice.[138]]

• Example: Moshe yells “AMEN!” louder than the person who blessed, disturbing others. Amen should not be shouted unless they encourage group participation.

Table 2: Proper Answering of Amen

3. Answering Amen to a blessing that one did not hear or does not know its identity:[143]

It is forbidden to answer an Amen Yesoma. An Amen Yesoma is considered an Amen to a blessing that one did not hear. This, however, is limited to only certain cases and it is disputed in Poskim as to which cases this Amen Yesoma applies. There are two opinions in this regard: The 1st opinion differentiates between a blessing one is being Yotzei and one that he is not being Yotzei, however he makes no differentiation between one who knows the identity of the blessing and one who does not.[144] The 2nd opinion differentiates between knowing and not knowing the Bracha and does not differentiate between whether one is being Yotzei the Bracha or not.[145]

1. One is fulfilling his obligation with this blessing:[146]

Some Poskim[147] rule that one may not answer Amen after any blessing that he is obligated to hear, meaning that he plans to fulfill his obligation through answering Amen after hearing it, if he did not hear the [entire[148]] blessing from the person saying it. This applies even if he knows what blessing is being said, nevertheless he is not allowed to answer Amen.[149] Other Poskim[150], however, rule that one may answer Amen after any blessing whose identity is known, even if he did not hear the blessing from the person saying it, and even if he plans to fulfill his obligation with this blessing, and he fulfills his obligation through answering this Amen. [If, however, he is not aware of which blessing was said, then according to all he may not answer Amen.] Practically, one is to be stringent like the first opinion.[151] Thus, if he plans to fulfill his obligation with this blessing, he must hear the actual words of the blessing from the person saying it. If he did not hear the actual words of the blessing, he is not to answer Amen, even if he is aware of which blessing was recited.

• Example: You join a group to fulfill your obligation for Kiddush but only hear the end from Rivka. You should not answer “Amen” nor rely on it to fulfill your obligation.

1. One is not fulfilling his obligation with the blessing:[152]

Did not hear and does not know the identity: Some Poskim[153] rule that one may answer Amen after any blessing that he is not obligated to hear, meaning that he does not plan to fulfill his obligation with it, even if he did not hear the blessing from the person saying it, and even if he does not know what blessing was said, nevertheless he is allowed to answer Amen. Other Poskim[154] however rule that one may not answer Amen after any blessing that he did not hear and whose identity is not known, even if he does not plan to fulfill his obligation with this blessing.[155] Practically, one is to be stringent like the latter opinion.[156] Thus, he is not to answer Amen for a blessing if he is not aware of which blessing was recited even if he does not plan to fulfill his obligation with this blessing.

Did not hear but knows the identity:[157] If one is aware of the blessing, and is not intending to be Yotzei with it, then according to all he may answer Amen even if he did not hear any words of the blessing from the person saying it. Furthermore, one is even obligated to answer Amen to the blessing, and it is not voluntary to do so.[158]

• Example: You enter a room just as someone finishes “… Borei Pri Hagafen.” Knowing they are making the blessing over wine, you still answer “Amen.”
• Example: You recognize a blessing being made (e.g., over bread) by Chaim even if you haven’t heard every word, and you are not fulfilling your own obligation. You answer “Amen.”

1. Kaddish, Kedusha and Barchu:[159]

Answering to Kaddish, Kedusha and Barchu follows the same laws as a blessing that one is not fulfilling his obligation with and thus one can answer towards it even if he did not hear at all any part of the Kaddish/Kedusha/Barchu from the Chazan.[160] [Nevertheless, in Kaddish, he must have in mind to answer Amen to the statement said by the Chazan as otherwise it is an Amen Yesoma since he did not hear it.[161] Some Poskim[162] rule it suffices to have in mind to answer Amen on the general Kaddish even if he does not know the specific area of Kaddish that the Chazan is holding.]

1. Chazaras Hashatz:[163]

Some Poskim[164] rule that even if one is not obligated to recite a certain blessing, nevertheless, if the blessing was instituted to be recited in order to fulfill the obligation of the public, then he may not answer Amen if he did not hear the blessing, even if he knows its identity [just as is the law regarding a blessing that one is fulfilling his obligation with, as explained in A]. Accordingly, one may not answer Amen to the blessing from the Chazan Chazaras if he did not hear the blessing.[165] Practically, one is to initially suspect for their opinion and thus be careful to hear the blessings of Chazaras Hashatz from the Chazan [and at the very least the concluding blessing[166]].[167] However, if one was unable to hear the blessing, such as if he was in middle of Shemoneh Esrei and when he completed his prayer the Chazan completed a certain blessing, he may answer Amen after it, so long as he knows the identity of the blessing.[168]

1. Birchas Hatorah:[169]

One may answer Amen after Birchas Hatorah of an Aliyah even if one did not hear the blessing.[170]

Table 3: Proper Answering of Amen

4. May one answer Amen to a blessing that was said through loudspeakers; microphone or a broadcast system, such as the telephone, radio, or live internet hookup?

Based on the rules explained in Halachas 2-3 regarding an Amen Yesoma, the following applies with regards to answering Amen for a blessing that was heard over broadcast. In this regard, there is a difference in law between one who plans to fulfill his obligation with the blessing that he is hearing and one who does not.

A blessing with which one is fulfilling his obligation: Initially, although there were some Poskim[193] who understood that one may fulfill a Mitzvah through hearing it on a radio, telephone, microphone or broadcast system[194], practically after further research into the understanding of how these systems work, the Poskim[195] conclude that this may not be done.[196] Thus, one cannot be Yotzei the Mitzvah of Megillah reading, Havdalah, or any other obligatory blessing through hearing it through a broadcast, radio, telephone, or live hookup. Likewise, one cannot be Yotzei through hearing it through a microphone or sound system. Furthermore, if one is listening to a blessing from any of the above technologies for the sake of being Yotzei, then since he indeed is not Yotzei, it is forbidden for him to answer Amen to the blessings that he hears.[197]

• Example: You listen to the Megillah reading through a broadcast from Avraham. You may not answer “Amen” to the blessings, nor do you fulfill the obligation.

A blessing with which one is not fulfilling his obligation:[198] It is permitted for one to answer Amen to a blessing that he does not plan to be Yotzei even if he heard it through the radio, telephone, microphone, or broadcast system if he hears the live conclusion of the blessing without any delay in the broadcast. However, if in the above cases there is even a slight delay of a few seconds between the real live reading and the broadcast that one is hearing, then one may not answer Amen to the blessings even if he is not hearing it for the sake of being Yotzei, due to it being an Amen Yesoma.

• Example: Zev hears the Chazan’s blessing through the shul speakers on Shabbos morning and, knowing which blessing is being recited, answers “Amen” with Kavana, even though he is seated in the adjoining room.
• Example: Moshe is traveling and joins his community’s prayer via a live audio stream. If there is no noticeable delay, Moshe can answer Amen or participate in Kaddish and Kedusha. However, if there is a delay of several seconds, he should not answer Amen.

5. Hearing blessings from a different room – Answering Amen to a blessing which was heard from a different area:

Answering Kaddish and Kedusha from a different area than the Minyan:[199] Once there is Minyan of ten Jews in one area that are saying Kaddish or Kedusha, anyone who hears their voices can[200] answer with them. This applies even if one is in a completely different house and there are many houses that intervene between them.[201] It is considered as if the person hearing the voice is together with them in the Minyan.[202]

Being Yotzei a blessing from a different area:[203] The same applies regarding being Yotzei [Shemoneh Esrei during Chazaras Hashatz] that only the Chazan and the congregation must be in the same room, however once they are in the same room, anyone who can hear the voice of the Chazan can be Yotzei even though he is not with them. The same applies regarding being Yotzei Kiddush[204], Havdalah[205], and Megillah[206] from a different area [and being included in the blessing of Birchas Kohanim[207], and doing Nefilas Apayim with the congregation[208]]. [However one cannot be Yotzei a blessing of Birchas Hanehnin over food or drink unless one is sitting together with the person saying the blessing, and even then, it is still best for one to say the blessing himself and not be Yotzei, as explained in Chapter 4 regarding Kevius. Thus, if one is not sitting in the same room as the person saying the blessing over food or drink, he cannot be Yotzei with him. However one can be Yotzei a blessing of Birchas Hanehnin over Besamim or over fire of Havdalah, or over wine of Kiddush or Havdalah even if he is in a different room.[209]]

If there are feces or idolatry in-between:[210] Some Poskim[211] rule that one may only answer for [Amen[212]] Kaddish or Kedusha [or be Yotzei a blessing[213]] from a different area than the Minyan if there is no feces, or idolatry which is considered like feces regarding this matter, found in-between the two areas. [Other Poskim[214] however argues that feces and idolatry do not intervene.] Practically, [although the main ruling is like the lenient opinion[215]] one is [nevertheless] to suspect of the stringent opinion.[216] [However in a time of need, some Poskim[217] rule one may choose to follow the lenient opinion. Others[218] rule one is always to be stringent.]

[1] Admur 215:2; Michaber 215:2; Mishneh Brachos 51b

[2] The reason: This is learned from the verse “Ki Shem Hashem Ekra, Havu Godel Lelokeinu”. Moshe said to Bnei Yisrael that when he recites a blessing with Hashem’s name the listeners are to answer Amen and give praise to Hashem. [M”B 215:8]

[3] Admur 189:6; M”A 215:3 in name of Midrash; Chesed Lealafim 215:4; Kaf Hachaim 187:4; 215:11

[4] M”A ibid

[5] Admur ibid

Is this a Mitzvah or obligation? Some Poskim rule that this answering of Amen is a mere Mitzvah and is not obligatory. [Implication of the wording of Admur ibid “Mitzvah” that it is not an obligation but a Mitzvah and Midas Chassidus to answer Amen and so is also implied from Orchos Chaim Kerias Hatorah 3 that says “It is permitted to answer Amen” and so rules Emek Sheila 53:2] However, some Poskim rule it is an see an obligation to answer Amen to a prayer or blessing, such as Harachaman. [M”A 215:3 in name of Midrash; Chesed Lealafim 215:4; Kaf Hachaim 215:11]

[6] M”A ibid; Chesed Lealafim 215:4; Kaf Hachaim 215:11

[7] Admur ibid; M”A 189:1; 215:3; Kol Bo 99 in name of Geonim

[8] M”A ibid

[9] See Aruch Hashulchan 215:1; Kaf Hachaim ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:7 footnote 42

[10] Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[11] Betzeil Hachochmah 5:90

[12] Kaf Hachaim 215:11

[13] See Admur 215:2

[14] Kaf Hachaim 215:11

[15] Piskeiy Teshuvos 51:11; See Admur 51:3 and 6

[16] Shabbos 119b

[17] Gemara ibid; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos “Some people’s concentration are aroused through raising their voice.”

[18] Rashi ibid

[19] Brachos 53b

[20] Sefer Chassidim 19

[21] Elya Raba 124:11; Perisha 124; This means that he is accepting the blessing with a swear and faith. See Chasam Sofer 15

[22] Chayeh Adam 6:1

[23] Nehara Hashaleim p. 15, brought in Kaf Hachaim 124:30

[24] Machatzis Hashekel 6:9 based on Asara Maamaros; Zohar Eikev and Vayeitzei; See Shach C.M. 382:4 in name of Maharshal who writes it is an obligation to recite blessings aloud in order to merit others with Amen and one who does not do so is a Rasha and see Shach ibid that the law that one is obligated to pay 10 Zehuvim for a stolen blessing is only if one could not answer Amen, such as the person who said the blessing said it quietly, and only if one planned to say the blessing aloud; See however Smeh 382:7 and Shach ibid that the above obligation is only by Milah, being it was instituted to be said aloud and in public, however by other Mitzvos, such as Shechita or covering the blood, one may say it quietly and so is the custom; See Bigdei Yesha 167:33 in name of Kisvei Arizal that if one is alone and unable to have someone answer Amen to his blessing he is to say it with great desire and love of Hashem. This concentration creates an angel who then answers Amen to his blessing.

[25] Zohar ibid; Asara Maamaros ibid; Machatzis Hashekel ibid

[26] Ben Ish Chaiy Maasey 14

[27] Heard from Rav Yehuda Leib and Eliyahu Landa Shlita; The Rebbe by Farbrengens was not heard to say blessings aloud, allowing the public to answer Amen; See also Smeh and Shach ibid that only by Milah is it an actual obligation

The reason: As Admur 213:4 rules that one who hears a blessing according to some opinions is Yotzei even if he did not have intent to be Yotzei, and hence in order to prevent others from entering into this doubt we therefore recite the blessings silently.

[28] M”B 124:25

[29] Halachos Ketanos 2:48; Beir Heiytiv 55:1; Kesher Gudal 9:27; Shalmei Tzibur p. 87; Beis Oveid 8; M”B 55:4; Kaf Hachaim 56:8; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:6

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is to answer after the last person who concluded, and it counts also for the first person. [Ashel Avraham Butchach 124:6] See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid who writes that the Shaareiy Teshuvah 56:3 and Birkeiy Yosef 56:1 argue on the above and rule that one is to only answer Amen to the first person concluding. This is incorrect as the Birkeiy Yosef and Shaareiy Teshuvah were not discussing the above case but rather a case in which you have many different Minyanim taking place in the same room and you are unable to answer Amen for every Minyan’s Kaddish. The Kesher Gudal [author of Birkeiy Yosef] brings both Halachos, one in 9:27 and one in 9:28, thus proving they do not contradict each other but are rather speaking of two different cases. Likewise, the Kaf Hachaim 56:7-8 records the two rulings in two separate Halachos and referring to two different cases, thus proving it is not a dispute or contradiction.

[30] Ashel Avraham 215; Orchos Chaim 124:6; Toras Chaim Sofer 66:8 that one who is involved in a Mitzvah is exempt from a Mitzvah; Divrei David 41; Mayim Rabim 2, brought in Kaf Hachaim 124:25; Shevet Halevi 9:43; Tzitz Eliezer 11:4; Salmas Chaim 62; Kinyan Torah 2:36; 4:9; Pischa Zuta 5; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 2:73-74; Yabia Omer 9:3; Shearim Hametzuyanim Behalacha 20:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 51:11 and 55:29 and 215:4

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is obligated to answer Amen even if he is in the midst of learning Torah, unless one learns like Rashbi and Toraso Umenuso. [Pischeiy Teshuvah brought in Kaf Hachaim 124:25]

[31] Shevet Halevi ibid; Poskim ibid; Vetzaruch Iyun from Igros Kodesh ibid that one is obligated to answer in-between the Shel Yad and Shel Rosh even though one is in the midst of a Mitzvah.

[32] Kaf Hachaim 215:10 in name of Meorei Or and Orchos Chaim 215:3

[33] The reason: The reason for this is so it does not sound like he is answering Amen to the curses he recited. [ibid]

[34] Rama 167:2; Or Zarua based on Yerushalmi

[35] The reason: As the Amen is also part of the blessing [Darkei Moshe 167:4; Admur 167:3; Gra 167] and through answering Amen the blessing of the person receives greater importance, and hence it is initially proper to intend to fulfill one’s obligation with the Amen said by the listeners. [Darkei Moshe ibid; Or Zarua ibid; Yerushalmi; M”B 167:20]

[36] See Biur Halacha 167:2 “Vehamevarech” that so is implied from Lechem Chamudos and Shiyurei Kneses Hagedola, and that aside for the Or Zarua, no other Posek mentioned such a law. This ruling of the Rama is likewise omitted from Admur in 167

[37] The reason: As there is no obligation for one who says a blessing to say or hear Amen, and on the contrary one who says Amen to his blessing is considered a fool. [Biur Halacha ibid]

[38] As Admur 167:3 completely omits this ruling of the Rama. Furthermore, Admur stipulates the entire law of delaying cutting the bread until the Amen has been completed by majority of the congregation to only a case in which the listeners are fulfilling their obligation with this blessing of Hamotzi, and plan to eat bread on its basis. Now, although Admur records the wording of the Darkei Moshe and Or Zarua ibid that Amen is part of the blessing, nevertheless Admur learns that this only applies when the person saying Amen is fulfilling his obligation with the blessing. Perhaps the reason for this is because in truth Admur rules there is no need for the person saying the blessing to concentrate by the Amen, not even in a case that the person saying Amen is fulfilling his obligation. However, nevertheless, he may not cut the bread until the Amen is complete, being that the Amen of one who is being Yotzei a blessing is part of his blessing, and the bread is to remain a Shalem until one completes the blessing.    

[39] Admur 124:11; 61:4; Levush 124:4

[40] Admur 124:9; Tur 124

[41] Admur 124:9

[42] Admur ibid; Michaber 124:6; Tur 124; Abudarham

[43] M”A 124:10

[44] Admur ibid; M”A ibid

[45] Admur ibid; Taz 124:3; M”A ibid

[46] Admur 124:10; Rama 124:7 in name of Kol Bo

[47] Seemingly this includes even children that are below the age of Chinuch. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 9

[48] Admur 124:11; 215:2; See Biur Halacha 215 “Chayav”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is best not to answer Amen to a blessing that one did not hear at all, even if he knows its identity. [Kaf Hachaim ibid]

[49] Admur 215:2

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is not obligated to answer Amen for a blessing that one did not hear at all, and it is merely voluntary to do so. [Kaf Hachaim 124:47; Biur Halacha 215 “Chayav” based on Taz and Mamar Mordechai, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3] Based on this some Poskim rule it is best not to answer Amen to such a blessing. [Kaf Hachaim ibid] If however one heard some of the words of the blessing, then he must answer Amen. [Kaf Hachaim ibid; Michaber 215:2]

[50] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid

[51] Kinyan Torah 5:9 based on M”A 53:15

[52] Admur ibid; Rama 215:2; Rabbeinu Yonah Brachos 51b; Yerushalmi

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is never to answer Amen after the blessing of a gentile. [Kesef Mishneh in opinion of Rambam; Bach 215; brought in M”A 215:3; Mateh Yosef, P”M 215 A”A 3 and Kaf Hachaim 215:14 that so is the ruling Michaber who omitted the ruling of the Rama] However, one may answer Amen after a Yishmaeili, being they do not serve idolatry. [Maharikash; Kaf Hachaim 215:15]

[53] The wording in Admur ibid “Nachri”, however the Rama ibid writes “idol worshiper”. The M”B 215:12 explains that a common idol worshiper does not intend towards idolatry when saying Hashem’s name and hence one is to answer Amen to his blessing. It is possible to learn this way in Admur as well, as Admur only forbids answering Amen to a person who is fervently attached to idolatry, and hence perhaps your normal gentile would be valid.

[54] If the blessing was not instituted by the Sages: If a gentile state may our G-d help you or save you one should not answer Amen to his blessing. If however he says May your G-d help you or save you then one may answer Amen. [Sefer Chassidim 427; Chesed Lealafim 215:4; Betzeil Hachochmah 3:39]

[55] Obligation or voluntary: Some Poskim rule one is not obligated to answer Amen for a blessing said by a gentile, and it is merely voluntary to do so. [Taz 215:3; P”M 215 M”Z 2; M”B 215:12; Kaf Hachaim 215:14] Admur however omits this opinion and implies that it is obligatory. Vetzaruch Iyun

[56] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid regarding Apikores; Rambam Brachos 1:13

[57] The reason: (As the common intents of an idolater’s mention of Hashem’s name is towards his idolatry.)  [Admur ibid]

[58] Igros Moshe 2:50

[59] Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 29

[60] Admur ibid; Michaber 215:2-3; Brachos 53b

[61] Admur ibid; Michaber 215:3; Rambam Brachos 1:15

[62] M”B 124:47

[63] The reason: A child is obligated to say an obligatory blessing [just like an adult] in order to educate them in Mitzvos. Thus, when they say a blessing at the appropriate time in order to exempt them from their obligation, one is to answer Amen to the blessing. The same applies regarding a child who is reading the Haftorah for the congregation and is saying the before and after blessings, that the congregation is to answer Amen to those blessings.  [Admur ibid]

[64] See Maaseh Shehayah brought above from Nehara Hashaleim p. 15, brought in Kaf Hachaim 124:30

[65] Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 45; However see Aruch Hashulchan 215:2 that it does not apply towards a female child. See Yabia Omer 2:13

[66] Admur ibid; M”A 215:8; Elya Raba 215:4; See Igros Kodesh 3:138

[67] The reason: Although the blessings recited by the children for the purposes of learning are blessings in vain, nevertheless the Sages permitted it to be done. However, by an adult, it is forbidden for him to say blessings outside of their appropriate time even if he is doing so for the sake of learning.  [Admur ibid]

[68] Admur 213:4; Michaber 213:2; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Brachos 45b

^[69]  Admur 215:3; Michaber 215:4; Rambam Brachos 1:15; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 281; See regarding blessings of children which are said for purposes of education: Admur 215:2; Michaber 215:2-3; Brachos 53b; M”A 215:8; Elya Raba 215:4; See Kaf Hachaim 25:40

[70] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 25:11

[71] Kaf Hachaim 25:40; Yabia Omer 1:29; Yechaveh Daas 4:31; Teshuvas Harambam in Peir Hador 105 that Safek Amen Lehakel

[72] Kaf Hachaim ibid

[73] Heard from Harav Yaakov Yosef Z”al

[74] P”M 124 A”A 14; M”B 124:47

[75] M”B 215:8 that so is implied from the Peri Megadim; M”B 124:47

[76] What is the age of Chinuch? Some say the age of Chinuch is five years old. [Yabia Omer 8:25] Others write it is from the time the child knows how to say the blessing on his own. [Salmas Chaim 134; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:8 footnote 44]

[77] Even Yisrael 8:14; See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 46; Or Letziyon 2:14

[78] See Divrei Chaim 2:9; Misgeres Hashulchan on Lechem Hapanim in Kitzur SHU”A 165:1; Tiferes Adam 3:6; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 49

[79] See Misgeres Hashulchan ibid

[80] The reason: As a child who is not old enough to be educated to clean himself, only the father is obligated to clean him. Thus, if a person [other than the father] hears his blessing, he must answer Amen towards it. [Misgeres Hashulchan ibid]

[81] Kitzur SHU”A ibid in Lechem Hapanim

[82] The reason: As it is forbidden for an adult to say a blessing while he has fecal remnant in his anus opening, and the same would apply to a child who is being educated in Mitzvos. [ibid]

[83] Divrei Chaim 2:9; Misgeres Hashulchan on Lechem Hapanim in Kitzur SHU”A 165:1; Tiferes Adam 3:6; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 49

[84] The reason: As if the child is not old enough to be educated to clean himself then he is exempt from this aspect of Chinuch. Also the father is exempt from cleaning him to such a point that no fecal remnant remains by his opening, as the child is not old enough to do so himself. Thus, it ends up that although the child is obligated in being educated for blessings, he is exempt from this level of cleanliness. [Misgeres Hashulchan ibid in lengthy explanation and defense of ruling of Divrei Chaim ibid]

[85] Misgeres Hashulchan ibid

[86] Kitzur SHU”A ibid in Lechem Hapanim

[87] The reason: As it is forbidden for an adult to say a blessing while he has rectal fecal remnant and the same would apply for a child. [ibid]

[88] Chochmas Shlomo 124; Mishmeres Shalom 11:1

[89] Yabia Omer 8:10 [Obligated answer Amen]; See Yagel Yaakov 42

[90] The reason: As he has not swerved from the dialect of the Sages.

[91] Alef Hamagen 582:43; Shevet Halevi 3:15; Halichos Shlomo 8:32 in name of Rav SZ”A

[92] The reason: As he is praying against the rulings of the Sages. [ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun regarding one who Davens aloud in private, in which case he may do so for concentration. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid; Halichos Shlomo ibid]

[93] Alef Hamagen ibid; Shraga Hameir 5:105

Obligation or voluntary: Some Poskim rule one is obligated to answer Amen for such a blessing. [Betzeil Hachochmah 5:164] From other Poskim however it is implied it is not obligatory. [See Halichos Shlomo ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215 footnote 35

[94] Admur 84:1 regarding the inner room of a bathhouse, and the same applies for a bathroom; Chochmas Shlomo 124; Kaf Hachaim 84:11

[95] The reason: As if one cannot answer Amen if there are feces intervening then certainly, he may not answer Amen in the bathroom itself. [ibid]

[96] Admur 124:11

[97] Brachos 47a

[98] Regarding that the law of Amen Yesoma applies by Kaddish so rules: Admur 56:4; 124:11; M”A 56:6; M”B 56:10; Igros Moshe 4:1

[99] Chavas Daas Y.D. Kuntrus Beis Hasafek 110:20; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:14

[100] Admur ibid; Michaber 124:8; Brachos 47a

[101] The severity: Ben Azaiy stated that whoever answers an Amen Yesoma his years will be snatched r”l. [Brachos ibid]

[102] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid

[103] Kaf Hachaim 124:45

[104] Admur ibid; Aruch “Amen”

[105] M”B 124:35; See Rivivos Efraim 1:88; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124 footnote 129

[106] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Brachos ibid

[107] The severity: Ben Azaiy stated that whoever answers an Amen Ketufa his years will be cut r”l. [Brachos ibid]

[108] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid

[109] Admur ibid; Rama ibid; Aruch ibid

[110] Admur 124:11; Michaber 124:8; Brachos 47a

[111] The severity: Ben Azaiy stated that whoever answers an Amen Yesoma his children will be Yesomim r”l. [Brachos ibid]

[112] Admur ibid; Rama ibid; Abudarham ibid

[113] M”B 124:34 based on P”M 124; See Biur Halacha 124:8 “Miyad”; Betzeil Hachomha 5:17

[114] Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:14

[115] Admur ibid; M”A 124:14; M”B 124:35

[116] The reason: As the great lengthening of a Niggun is considered an interval. [Admur ibid]

[117] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 124 footnote 129

[118] Admur 124:11

[119] The reason: Even though many people in the congregation have already finished answering Amen, such as is the case if one finished Shemoneh Esrei as the Chazan concluded a blessing and many people in the congregation have already answered Amen, nevertheless, so long as majority of the congregation has not yet completed the Amen he may answer with them. (Now, although there is delay between the conclusion of the blessing and the start of his Amen, nevertheless) so long as the majority of the congregation has not completed their Amen it is still considered that the aspect of this blessing has not been fully completed, as the answering of Amen is also part of the blessing, as explained in 167:3. [Admur ibid, parentheses in original]

[120] The reason: (As one does not answer Amen after an Amen but rather after the blessing, and the one is required to answer Amen immediately after the conclusion of the blessing, otherwise it is considered an Amen Yesoma.) Now, although there are a minority of people that are still reciting Amen, nevertheless this is due to the fact that they lengthen the Amen, and therefore their Amen is meaningless sin this regard, as one who lengthens in Amen too much is making a mistake. Accordingly, the aspect of the blessing has been fully completed upon the majority of the congregation completing their Amen. (If one were to now answer Amen it would be considered an Amen Yesoma, being that it has a long delay between the conclusion of the blessing and the start of his answer. Now, although the Amen of the congregation is also part of the blessing, nevertheless one may not answer Amen after them, as one does not answer Amen after an Amen but rather after the person saying the blessing.)  [Admur ibid, parentheses in original]

Other opinions: Some rule that one may answer Amen even after majority of the congregation has completed their Amen, so long as its Kdei Dibbur of the Amen of the majority. [Biur Halacha 124:8 “Miyad”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:14]

[121] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; Taz 124:6

[122] The reason: As the entire congregation began their Amen immediately after the conclusion of the blessing, [and there is hence no interval involved]. [Admur ibid]

[123] Admur ibid; Rama 124:11

[124] Admur ibid, parentheses in original

The reason: The reason one requires nine people remaining is because a Davar Shebekidusha may not be said with less than ten people and the nine people join the Chazan for a Minyan. [Admur ibid]

[125] See Admur 124:11 regarding the definition of an Amen Yesoma; Mishpitei Uziel ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3

[126] The reason: If it is not live then there is no greater Amen Yesoma than this. [See Admur ibid]

[127] Rav Akiva Eiger, brought in Biur Halacha 124:11 “Vekodem”

[128] Magen Giborim, brought in Biur Halacha 124:11 “Vekodem”

[129] See M”B 141:17 in name of Elya Raba and Shaar Efraim

[130] Admur 124:1; Michaber 124:8; Brachos 47a

[131] M”B ibid

[132] See Admur ibid; Brachos ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 139 footnote 70

[133] Admur 124:12; Michaber ibid; Brachos ibid; Rashi on Rif 35

[134] The severity: Ben Azaiy stated that whoever answers an Amen Ketzara his years will be shortened r”l. Whoever lengthens his Amen, his years are likewise lengthened [Brachos ibid] The reason for this is because one who hastily says his Amen appears as if the Amen is a burden that he wishes to cast off of him. [M”B 124:36; Beis Yosef 124]

[135] The reason: As Keil Melech Neman is the Roshei Teivos of the word Amen. [Admur ibid and 61:4; Levush 124:4]

[136] Admur 124:13; Michaber 124:12; Brachos 45a and 47a according to Nussach of many Rishonim

[137] The reason: As the verse [Tehillim 34:4] states “Gadlu LaHashem Iti Uneromima Shemo Yachdav.” [Admur ibid]

[138] M”B 124:47

[139] Chavas Daas Y.D. Kuntrus Beis Hasafek 110:20; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:14

[140] Although it is a Mitzvah to answer Amen to one who hears someone blessing a Jew, nevertheless, seemingly it is not an obligation to do so. [Admur 189:6 “It is a Mitzvah to answer Amen”; However some Poskim rule it is an see an obligation to answer Amen to a prayer or blessing, such as Harachaman. [M”A 215:3 in name of Midrash; Chesed Lealafim 215:4; Kaf Hachaim 215:11]

[141] Regarding that the law of Amen Yesoma applies by Kaddish so rules: Admur 56:4; 124:11; M”A 56:6; M”B 56:10; Igros Moshe 4:1

[142] Derisha 127:1 “It is forbidden to answer Amen for no reason”; Se also M”B 215:21; Biur Halacha 215:4 “Veassur”

[143] Admur 124:11; 215:2 [All sources in Admur ibid refer to 124:11 unless stated otherwise]

[144] When being Yotzei it is irrelevant whether or not he knows the Bracha, as he is not Yotzei unless he heard it. When not being Yotzei it is irrelevant whether or not knows the Bracha, as he may always answer Amen.

[145] Thus if knows the Bracha then may always answer, even to be Yotzei and when he does not know the Bracha he may not answer even if he is not being Yotzei.

[146] Admur 124:11

[147] 1^st opinion in Admur 124:1; Michaber 124:8; Rabbeinu Yonah Brachos 35a; Rosh Brachos 7:17

[148] See Admur 213:4 “From beginning until the end”; See also Admur 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Brachos 53b

[149] The reason: As since he did not hear the actual words of the blessing from the person saying it, therefore if he answers Amen, it is considered an Amen Yesoma. [Admur ibid]

[150] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; Rashi Brachos 47a; Tosafus Brachos ibid

[151] Admur ibid; M”A 124:13; Bach 124

[152] Admur 124:11

[153] 1^st opinion in Admur 124:1; Michaber 124:8; Rabbeinu Yonah Brachos 35a; Rosh Brachos 7:17

[154] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; Rama 124:8; Rashi Brachos 47a; Tosafus Brachos ibid

[155] The reason: As since he did not hear the actual words of the blessing from the person saying it, therefore if he answers Amen, it is considered an Amen Yesoma. [Admur ibid]

[156] Admur ibid; M”A 124:13; Bach 124; Chida in Kesher Gudal 9:5; Od Yosef Chaiy Vayechi 19; Kaf Hachaim 124:47

[157] Admur 124:11; 215:2; See Biur Halacha 215 “Chayav”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is best not to answer Amen to a blessing that one did not hear at all, even if he knows its identity. [Kaf Hachaim ibid]

[158] Admur 215:2

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is not obligated to answer Amen for a blessing that one did not hear at all, and it is merely voluntary to do so. [Kaf Hachaim 124:47; Biur Halacha 215 “Chayav” based on Taz and Mamar Mordechai, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3] Based on this some Poskim rule it is best not to answer Amen to such a blessing. [Kaf Hachaim ibid] If however one heard some of the words of the blessing, then he must answer Amen. [Kaf Hachaim ibid; Michaber 215:2]

[159] Admur ibid; 2^nd opinion in Admur 57:2 regarding Barchu; Rama 124:11

Other opinions in Admur regarding Barchu: Admur 57:2 states as follows: Some Poskim rule that if the Chazan said Barchu quietly then all the people who did not hear the Barchu from him may not answer to his Barchu. Rather, if they heard the congregation that is around the Chazan answering after the Chazan “Baruch Hashem” they are to answer Amen after them. [1^st opinion in Admur ibid; M”A 57:1; Brachos 49b] However, there is an opinion that says that if there are nine people who heard the Barchu from the Chazan and are answering Amen afterwards then the entire congregation may answer with them being that there are ten people saying a Davar Shebekidusha. [2^nd opinion in Admur; Rama 124:11; Orchos Chaim brought in Beis Yosef 124; Elya Zuta 139:3] Practically, the main ruling follows the latter opinion, as ruled in 124:11 and in the M”A there. [Admur ibid] The reason for this is because so rules Rav Haiy Gaon and so is proven from the Gemara in Sukkah 51b regarding the Alexandrian Shul, and this Gemara has no other explanation. Now, the M”A himself brings this Gemara in 124:18 and thus contradicts his ruling here, Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol. [ Kuntrus Achron 57:1]

[160] The reason: Although we stated above that some Poskim rule that any blessing that one is obligated in , he does not fulfill his obligation with answering Amen unless he hears the words of the blessing. Nevertheless in this case even they agree that he may answer without hearing the words. The reason for this is because he is not considered obligated in answering for the Kaddish and Kedusha regarding this matter, as only those matters that one is obligated to recite even privately are included in the above stringency, and Kaddish:Kedusha:Barchu one is only obligated to say with a Minyan. [Admur ibid; M”A 124:18]  This is proven from the shul of Alexandria who would answer Amen to Kaddish and Kedusha based on the waving of a flag. [M”A ibid; See Sukkah 51b]

[161] Admur 56:4; M”A 56:6; M”B 56:10

[162] Shevet Halevi 8:22; See Ashel Avraham Butchach 124; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124 footnote 138

[163] Admur 124:11

[164] 3^rd opinion in Admur ibid; Aruch Amen in name of Rav Kohen Tzedek; Tosafos Sukkah 52a

[165] The reason: As since the Sages instituted for the Chazan to repeat the prayer in order to fulfill the obligation of those who do not know how to prayer, and therefore the congregation is obligated to be silent and hear the blessings from the Chazan and answer Amen afterwards, therefore these blessings are considered an obligation upon them to hear from the Chazan, even though he already Davened Shemoneh Esrei. [Admur ibid]

[166] M”B 124:33

[167] Admur ibid; Bach 124; M”B 124:33; Levush; M”B 124:33; Chida in Kesher Gudal 9:5; Od Yosef Chaiy Vayechi 19; Kaf Hachaim 124:47

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule there is no need to be stringent in this matter. [Ashel Avraham Butchach 124; Shulchan Hatahor 124:15

[168] Admur ibid; Michaber and Rama 124:11; Mahari in Terumos Hadeshen 2:109

[169] Admur 124:11; Yerushalmi Sukkah 5:1

[170] The reason: As the blessing was not instituted for the sake of the congregation but rather due to that it is proper for one who reads from the Torah to recite a blessing. Now, although it is an obligation upon the congregation to hear the blessing being said [as explained in 139:6] nevertheless the main part of the blessing is on his own behalf and not on behalf of the congregation, as is the case with Chazaras Hashatz. [Admur ibid]

[171] Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:14

[172] Admur 213:4 “From beginning until the end”; See also Admur 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Brachos 53b

[173] Admur 213:4 “From beginning until the end”; See also Admur 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Teshuvas Harambam Pear Hador 101; Brachos 53b; Yerushalmi Brachos 8:5; Megillah 1:9; Sefer Hamichtam and Hashlama ibid; Ravya 153 and 159; Peri Chadash 124; P”M 124 M”Z 4

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the blessing. [Beis Yosef 124 in opinion of Rashi and Tosafus, which is the 2^nd opinion in Admur 124:11; See however Peri Chadash ibid and Mamar Mordechai 124:11; P”M ibid] Other Poskim rule that by a Chazan with a Minyan, one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the entire blessing but only its end. [Raavad brought in Michtam and Rashbatz and Meiri Brachos 47a]

[174] The reason: As one does not fulfill his obligation with any blessing unless he hears the entire blessing from beginning to end. [Admur ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun from Admur 124:11 who implies that if one knew which blessing was being said, then according to the second opinion one may answer Amen and seemingly has fulfilled his obligation with this blessing. [So learns Beis Yosef 124 in opinion of Rashi and Tosafus, which is the 2^nd opinion in Admur 124:11] Furthermore, perhaps even according to the first opinion if he transgressed and answered Amen, he has fulfilled his obligation. In truth however the Poskim rule that the entire dispute in 124:11 is only with regards to whether one may answer Amen, and not at all regarding whether one can be Yotzei the blessing, as in order to be Yotzei the blessing one must hear every word of the blessing. Thus, according to all he has not fulfilled his obligation if he did not hear the entire blessing. [Peri Chadash ibid; P”M 124 M”Z 4] Vetzaruch Iyun then how is there ever a case that one intends to fulfill his obligation if he did not hear the blessing. The moment he notices that he did not hear the blessing he does not have in mind to fulfill his obligation, so how would this dispute ever apply.

[175] Admur 46:1; M”A 46:8; Peri Chadash 46:3

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one fulfills his obligation of P”M 124 M”Z 4 Brachos with answering Amen over the blessing even if he did not hear the blessing, so long as he knows which blessing was said. [Beis Yosef 46; P”M 124 M”Z 4]

[176] The reason: The reason for this is because the obligation of Meiah Brachos is different than the obligation of other blessings, and thus is permitted to answer Amen even if one did not hear the blessing, even according to the first opinion in 124:11. [P”M ibid]

[177]  Igros Kodesh 13:179 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 1:81] based on Admur 124:11; Rama 124:11; M”a 124:18; Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3

The reason: There is no need for a person to hear the natural voice of the Chazan or person reciting Kaddish or blessing in order to be allowed to answer Amen, Kaddish and Kedusha, so long as one knows the blessing that he is answering for, and is not being Yotzei the blessing with the person saying it. [See Admur 124:11 for various opinions and details of this matter, and that according to all one may answer for Amen of Kaddish, Kedusha and blessings if one knows the blessing that one is answering for, even though he did not hear any words of the blessing. So also rules Rama 124:11 and M”A 124:18] This is based on an explicit statement of the Talmud  Sukkah 51b that the Shul of Alexandria there were at times over 1,200,000 worshippers and they could not all hear the Chazan. They thus established a system that the Chazan would raise a flag to symbol to the congregation for when they should answer Amen. This proves that there is no need to actually hear the blessing in order to answer Amen. [M”A ibid; Rebbe ibid]

[178] See Igros Kodesh 13:221 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 1:81]

[179] See Admur 124:11; Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3

[180] Admur ibid

[181] Admur 215:2

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is not obligated to answer Amen for such a blessing, and it is merely voluntary to do so. [See Biur Halacha 215 “Chayav” based on Taz and Mamar Mordechai, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3]

[182] Conclusion of Admur 124:11 that one is to be stringent like both opinions and according to the first opinion one is not Yotzei if he does not hear the blessing from the person and he thus may not answer Amen due to it being an Amen Yesoma.

[183] The Halachic issues regarding this question are 1) Is this considered an Amen Yesoma? [Admur 124:11] 2) Must one suspect that there are feces interfering between the answerer and the person saying the blessing? [Admur 55:22]

[184] Piskeiy Teshuvah 167; Rav SZ”A in Minchas Shlomo 9:1; Moadim Uzmanim 6:105; Mishpitei Uziel 1:5 [brought in Igros Kodesh 13:221as opinion of Sephardim]; Beir Moshe 3:166-168; See Mishneh Sachir 30; Tzitz Eliezer 20:19; Ratz Katzevi 2:10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3

[185] The reason: Being that there may be feces or idols that intervene between him and the area that the blessing or Minyan is taking place. [See Admur 55:22; Koveitz Oholei Sheim 5:104] Alternatively, this is because it is defined as an Amen Yesoma since the person is not in the same room as the person saying the blessing. [Piskeiy Teshuvah ibid; Minchas Shlomo ibid; Moadim Uzmanim ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol as to why being in a different area would make it an Amen Yesoma, contrary to the explicit ruling in Admur 55:22 based on the Gemara and Poskim

[186] Minchas Elazar 2:72; Igros Moshe 2:108; 4:91; Yechaveh Daas 2:68; See Igros Kodesh 13:179 and 13:221 and Likkutei Sichos 21:497 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 1:81] that the Ashkenazim [i.e. Minchas Elazar of Hungary] are lenient in this, thus implying that the Rebbe rules like the opinion.

[187] The reason: This is permitted as a) There is no need to be in the same room as a person in order to answer Amen, [Admur 55:22] Now, although most certainly there are feces or idol worship in-between, nevertheless we are lenient being that the phone wires that carry the voice bypass the feces and idols. This is in addition to that the wires are in the air, higher than ten Tefachim and is thus considered a different Reshus. [Minchas Elazar ibid; See Admur 345:17]b) There is no need to hear the actual voice of the person saying the blessing so long as one knows what blessing he is answering for. [Admur 124:11]

[188] So seems to be the leaning opinion of the Rebbe ibid; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3 that one may be lenient regarding Amen of a blessing [however not obligatory] however not regarding Kaddish and Kedusha

[189] Admur 124:11

[190] Heard from a media technician; Verified through sampling various live broadcasts and seeing a delay between different channels. 

[191] See Admur 124:11 regarding the definition of an Amen Yesoma; Mishpitei Uziel ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3

[192] The reason: If it is not live then there is no greater Amen Yesoma than this. [See Admur ibid]

[193] Minchas Elazar 2:72; Rav Pesach Tzvi Frank in Mikraei Kodesh 11 based on Halachos Ketanos 2:45; Hearos on Halachos Ketanos 276; Possibility entertained by Igros Moshe 2:108; 4:126 regarding Bedieved or time of need [See there that his leaning opinion is to permit being Yotzei and that so should be done in a case of need, that one is unable to hear Havdalah or Megillah otherwise, and that perhaps one is not to protest one who is lenient, although he concludes to protest being that the allowance is unclear]; Tzitz Eliezer 8:11-10 regarding Bedieved or time of need; Shevet Halevi 5:84 that from the letter of the law seemingly one is Yotzei [Rav Yaakov Meir Shtern claimed that the Shevet Halevi was indeed lenient to rely on this Bedieved ]; Opinion of Rav Steinman quoted in Vayishma Moshe Gilyon 23

The opinion of the Chazon Ish: Chazon Ish, brought by Rav SZ”A in footnote in Minchas Shlomo 1:9, replied to Rav SZ”A with an argument to be lenient to validate if one heard a Mitzvah from a microphone, radio and the like, although Rav SZ”A concluded that he does not understand his argument; Practically, Rav Chaim Kanievsky stated that the Chazon Ish was not lenient to permit hearing Megillah from a microphone and even Bedieved one is required to re-hear it

[194] The reason for the allowance: As perhaps the above machines send the actual voice of the reader to the ears of the listener. [Igros Moshe ibid] Furthermore, even if the transmitted voice is not the natural voice of the reader, perhaps there is no need to hear the actual voice so long as the voice that one hears is the direct result of the actual voice and is heard at the same time as his natural voice. Furthermore, perhaps all hearing is through the sounds being reproduced in the air until it reaches the ear of the listener, and nonetheless one is Yotzei. [Arguments of Chazon Ish ibid; Igros Moshe ibid; Shevet Halevi ibid; Mikraeiy Kodesh ibid that so is proven from Halachos Ketanos ibid who permits mechanical hearing aids as carrying a sound through a secondary means is valid]

[195] Daas Torah 689 based on Halachos Ketanos; Mahary Engel Brachos 25; Rav SZ”A in Minchas Shlomo 1:9 “One cannot be Yotzei anything from a microphone and speakers or the radio and telephone, and those who puzzle at this ruling simply do not understand the mechanics of these machines, thinking erroneously that there is some kind of magical transportation of the persons actual voice. I have lengthened in this Teshuvah to negate this mistake, as they do not know the truth, and I have spoken with people knowledgeable of this matter, and they all agree with me.”; Eretz Tzvi 1:23; Mishpitei Uziel 1:5; Final ruling of Chazon Ish, as brought in previous footnotes; Minchas Yitzchak 1:37 and 3:38; Yechaveh Daas 2:68; 3:54; Chazon Ovadia Megillah 56; Mishneh Halachos 4:85; Kinyan Torah 1:75; Beir Moshe 3:166-168; Piskeiy Teshuvos 689:3; Rebbe in Igros Kodesh 23:304 and Likkutei Sichos 21:496, printed in Shulchan Menachem 3:319,“What is heard is not a man’s voice at all (and does not even resemble the case of one who sounds a Shofar in a pit). It is obviously most novel, even strange, to suggest that an indirect effect (Koach kocho) and a basic transformation of the very nature of speech, should serve as a substitute for speech. Even though the recent scholars who have ruled otherwise include reputed Poskim, it is evident from their very responsa that those who explained them the nature and workings of the telephone made a basic mistake.”; Rav Yaakov Yosef Z”l completely invalidates using it, and states the Poskim who permitted made a mistake in their understanding of these systems; The following lenient Poskim all agree that one is initially to be stringent: Igros Moshe 2:108; 4:126; Tzitz Eliezer 8:11; Shevet Halevi 5:84 that it is forbidden to hear from the above systems even though it is possible that one is Yotzei

Other opinions who rule that despite the new and confirmed knowledge of the system one can be Yotzei: Some of the lenient Poskim ibid rule that despite the confirmed understanding of the mechanics of the above machines and that the sound is not the natural voice, nevertheless one is still Yotzei, or is at least questionably Yotzei the Mitzvah, as perhaps there is no need to hear the actual voice so long as the voice that one hears is the direct result of the actual voice and is heard at the same time as his natural voice. [See Chazon Ish ibid; Igros Moshe ibid; Mikraeiy Kodesh ibid; Tzitz Eliezer ibid]

[196] The reason: As one must hear the readers voice to be Yotzei the Mitzvah [Admur 124:11], and this voice must be the persons natural voice [See Admur 587:1; Michaber 587:1; Gemara R”H 27b where echoes are invalidated for Shofar hearing] and one is thus not Yotzei the Mitzvah if he hears an artificial mimic of the readers voice. Now, being that the above technologies do not magically send the natural voice of the reader to a further distance but simply make an artificial mimicking of it, therefore one cannot be Yotzei the Mitzvah through hearing the Megillah through a broadcast, radio, telephone, or live hookup. Just as one cannot be Yotzei a Mitzvah by playing a recording of the Mitzvah, as one is not presently hearing the voice of one who is obligated in the Mitzvah, but rather of a machine which contains no obligation, so too one cannot be Yotzei even if the event is live, as in both cases it is a machine made voice being sounded, and machines are not obligated in Mitzvos. [Rav SZ”A ibid; Rebbe ibid] This is in addition to the fact that some Poskim rule that it is forbidden to ever answer Amen through a distanced transmission being that there are churches and bathrooms in the interim area where the voice travels. [See Piskeiy Teshuvah 167; Rav SZ”A in Minchas Shlomo 9:1; Moadim Uzmanim 6:105; Mishpitei Uziel 1:5 [brought in Igros Kodesh 13:221 as opinion of Sephardim]; Beir Moshe 3:166-168]

[197] Conclusion of Admur 124:11 that one is to be stringent like both opinions and according to the first opinion one is not Yotzei if he does not hear the blessing from the person and he thus may not answer Amen due to it being an Amen Yesoma; Chazon Ovadia ibid

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one is to always answer Amen to a blessing said over the telephone, due to doubt. [Igros Moshe 4:26]

[198] Admur 124:11; Rama 124:8; Abudarham; Brachos 47a; M”B 124:34

[199] Admur ibid; Michaber ibid; Rebbe Yehoshua Ben Levi in Pesachim 85b

Other opinions in Gemara: Tosafus [Pesachim ibid] learns that according to Rebbe Yehuda in Pesachim ibid [who argues on Yehoshua Ben Levi] one cannot answer unless he is in the same room. However according to Rashi’s explanation possibly Rebbe Yehuda agrees with Rebbe Yehoshua on this point.

[200] See Q&A regarding if this is voluntary or obligatory!

[201] The reason: As even a divider of metal cannot separate between a Jew and their father in Heaven. [Admur ibid and 128:37 and 131:3; Rebbe Yehoshua Ben Levi ibid]

[202] Admur 131:3

[203] Admur 55:22; Mishneh Rosh Hashana 27b as explained in Tosafus ibid

[204] Admur 273:10 and 213:1 regarding that one is Yotzei Kiddush and Havdalah even if they are not in the same room as the person saying it

[205] Admur 213:1

[206] Michaber 690:14 that one can assume that the Chazan has in mind to fulfill the Mitzvah for all the listeners, including listeners that are behind the Shul and cannot be seen.

[207] Admur 128:37

[208] Admur 131:3

[209] 213:1

[210] Admur 55:22

[211] Opinion in Admur ibid; Michaber 55:20; Bahag in name of Rav Yehudaiy Gaon in name of Rav Acha; Mahary Abuhav in name of Orchos Chaim in name of Rav Achaiy Gaon

[212] Halef Lecha Shlomo 40; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:30; Minchas Elazar 2:72

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the above law only applies to answering for a Davar Shebekidusha and not towards Amen. [Ashel Avraham Butchach 55; See Poskim in Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:30 footnote 212]

[213] Machatzis Hashekel 273:13 regarding Kiddush; M”B 194:8 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Vetzaruch Iyun from Admur ibid who positioned this opinion between the Halacha of Kedusha:Kaddish and being Yotzei, hence implying they only argue regarding if one may answer, Vetzaruch Iyun.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the above law only applies to answering for a Davar Shebekidusha and not towards Amen. [See Poskim in Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:30 footnote 212]

[214] First opinion in Michaber and Admur ibid.

[215] Implication of Michaber who only brings as Yeish Omrim, and Admur ibid who does not write Vichein Ikkur and simply writes to suspect for their words; Levushei Serud  55:20; Maaseh Rav 47; M”B 55:62 that it is implied from Michaber and Rama that they mainly hold like the lenient opinion; See Shulchan Hatahor 55:8

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the main opinion follows the stringent opinion. [Kaf Hachaim 55:95]

[216] Admur ibid; Levushei Serud ibid; Kaf Hachaim 55:95

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one is only to be stringent regarding Barchu and other matters which mention Hashem’s name and not regarding Kaddish and Kedusha. [Makor Chaim 55:20; M”B 55:62 in name of Chayeh Adam; Ashel Avraham Butchach]

[217] Levushei Serud ibid

[218] Kaf Hachaim 55:95

[219] See Minchas Elazar 2:72

[220] Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:30

[221] Afikei Maginim Biurim 12, brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 205

[222] Chochmas Shlomo 124

[223] The reason: As if one cannot answer Amen if there are feces intervening then certainly he may not answer Amen in the bathroom itself. [ibid]

[224] Biur Halacha 55:20 “Veyeish Omrim”

[225] PT 55:30

[226] Old dialects of the Shulchan Aruch in Michaber write “gentile” instead of idols and the censorship changed the wording; Beis Yosef 55; Perisha 55:10; Elya Raba 55:18; P”M 55 A”A 15; Beis David 32; Machazik Bracha 55:15; Siddur Beis Oved; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayechi 7; Chesed Lealafim 55:6; Yifei Laleiv 5:1; Shaareiy Teshuvah 55:17; Toras Chaim Sofer 55:22; M”B 55:65 that either idols or idol worshipers intervene; Kaf Hachaim 55:92 in name of many Poskim and based on Zohar Mishpatim that all gentiles are invalid; M”B 55:65 that either idols or idol worshipers intervene

[227] Beis David ibid; Machazik Bracha 55:16; Shaareiy Teshuvah 55:17; Toras Chaim Sofer ibid

[228] M”A 55:15; Admur 55:22 based on the fact he writes that only idols are invalid due to being like feces; Devar Shmuel 189, brought in Beir Heiytiv 55:17; Minchas Elazar 2:72

[229] See Admur ibid

[230] Toras Chaim Sofer ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[231] See Admur ibid

[232] So is proven from the fact that it is omitted in Admur and all previous Poskim; Ashel Avraham Butchach 55 regrading if the male Erva is revealed in-between that it does not disqualify answering being one is not to add on the items listed by the Sages. 

Other opinions: Some Poskim imply that if there is an Erva in-between the answerer and the person saying the blessing then it invalidates his ability to answer. [See Orach Neman 55:34; Piskeiy Teshuvos 55:30 footnote 203] 

[233] The Halachic issues regarding this question are 1) Is this considered an Amen Yesoma? [Admur 124:11] 2) Must one suspect that there are feces interfering between the answerer and the person saying the blessing? [Admur 55:22]

[234] Piskeiy Teshuvah 167; Rav SZ”A in Minchas Shlomo 9:1; Moadim Uzmanim 6:105; Mishpitei Uziel 1:5 [brought in Igros Kodesh 13:221as opinion of Sephardim]; Beir Moshe 3:166-168; See Mishneh Sachir 30; Tzitz Eliezer 20:19; Ratz Katzevi 2:10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3

[235] The reason: Being that there may be feces or idols that intervene between him and the area that the blessing or Minyan is taking place. [See Admur 55:22; Koveitz Oholei Sheim 5:104] Alternatively, this is because it is defined as an Amen Yesoma since the person is not in the same room as the person saying the blessing. [Piskeiy Teshuvah ibid; Minchas Shlomo ibid; Moadim Uzmanim ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol as to why being in a different area would make it an Amen Yesoma, contrary to the explicit ruling in Admur 55:22 based on the Gemara and Poskim

[236] Minchas Elazar 2:72; Igros Moshe 2:108; 4:91; Yechaveh Daas 2:68; See Igros Kodesh 13:179 and 13:221 and Likkutei Sichos 21:497 [printed in Shulchan Menachem 1:81] that the Ashkenazim [i.e. Minchas Elazar of Hungary] are lenient in this, thus implying that the Rebbe rules like the opinion.

[237] The reason: This is permitted as a) There is no need to be in the same room as a person in order to answer Amen, [Admur 55:22] Now, although most certainly there are feces or idol worship in-between, nevertheless we are lenient being that the phone wires that carry the voice bypass the feces and idols. This is in addition to that the wires are in the air, higher than ten Tefachim and is thus considered a different Reshus. [Minchas Elazar ibid; See Admur 345:17]b) There is no need to hear the actual voice of the person saying the blessing so long as one knows what blessing he is answering for. [Admur 124:11]

[238] So seems to be the leaning opinion of the Rebbe ibid; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 56:3 that one may be lenient regarding Amen of a blessing [however not obligatory] however not regarding Kaddish and Kedusha

[239] Admur 124:11

[240] Heard from a media technician; Verified through sampling various live broadcasts and seeing a delay between different channels. 

[241] See Admur 124:11 regarding the definition of an Amen Yesoma; Mishpitei Uziel ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos 215:3

[242] The reason: If it is not live then there is no greater Amen Yesoma than this. [See Admur ibid]