From the Ravs Desk: Latest articles and Q&A [Tuesday 30th Kisleiv 5785]

Woman:

Mitzvos that they are not obligated in – Being Motzi others:^[1] Although a woman may choose to recite a blessing prior to performing even mitzvahs that they are exempt from^[2], nonetheless, a woman cannot fulfill a Mitzvah or its blessing on behalf of a man if she is not equally obligated in that mitzvah. Thus, by all Mitzvah’s which women are exempt from fulfilling due to them being time-dependent, they cannot be Motzi men who are obligated in it. They cannot be Motzi them neither in the fulfillment of the actual Mitzvah or its blessing. [Seemingly, they also cannot be Motzi other women if they had already fulfilled the Mitzvah, or do not plan on doing so until later on.^[3] Thus, for example, a woman who was already Yotzei the mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, cannot say the blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the shofar.]

Mitzvos that they are not obligated in – Being Yotzei from others:^[4] Women who are exempt from a Mitzvah can only be Yotzei the blessing from others if that other individual is saying the blessing on behalf of themselves or on behalf of other people that are obligated in it. Thus, for example, a man or woman who was not yet Yotzei the mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, may say the blessing on behalf of himself and likewise include be Motzi a woman who has yet to hear the shofar. However, a man or woman who was already Yotzei the Mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, cannot say the blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the shofar.^[5]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Yotzei from others:^[6] A woman who is obligated in a Mitzvah can be Yotzei the Mitzvah and its blessing through having another person, whether man or women, do so on their behalf. For example, a man or woman may read Megillah with a blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the Megillah. Likewise, a man or woman may recite Kiddush on behalf of a woman who has yet to be Yotzei Kiddush. This applies even if the man or woman who is reciting the blessing has already fulfilled their obligation and is repeating the Mitzvah and blessing just for the sake of the woman.^[7] However, in such a case, the blessing may only be  repeated on her behalf in the event that she does not know how to say the blessing herself.^[8]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Motzi others:^[9] A woman who is obligated in a Mitzvah can be Motzi others who are obligated in that Mitzvah or its blessing. This applies even to being Motzi other men with her blessing. This applies even she has already fulfilled her obligation and is repeating the Mitzvah and blessing just for the sake of the other man or woman. ^[10] Nevertheless, it is not proper for a woman to be Motzi a man.^[11]

______________________________

[1] See Admur 186:2; 296:19 regarding Havdalah; Brachos 20b; P”M 17 A”A 2; Kaf Hachaim 17:9; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 199:9; See regarding Kiddush: 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1;

[2] Admur 17:3 [Tzitzis]; Kuntrus Achron 489:1; 296:19 [Havdalah]; 489:2 [Sefiras Haomer]; 589:2 [Shofar]; 640:2 [Sukkah]; Rama 589:6; Taz 658:9; M”A 658:11; M”B 655:1; Rabbeinu Tam R”H 33a; Ran; Rosh in name of Mahritz Geios; Tur 589; Ritva Sukkah 2; Rashba 123; Maggid Mishneh Shofar 2 in name of Rashba; Shut Min Hashamayim 1; Birkeiy Yosef 654:2; Yosef Ometz 82; See Kaf Hachaim 17:4; 589:23

Other Opinions-Sefaradim: Some Poskim rule that women may never recite a blessing over any Mitzvah that they are not obligated in. [Michaber 589:6; Beis Yosef 589; Rambam Hilchos Tzitzis; Igur in name of Reb Yeshaya; Rashi, brought in Hagahos on Rambam; Chacham Tzevi] The Michaber ibid rules that they cannot say a blessing as Safek Brachos Lihakel. [Beis Yosef 589] The Birkeiy Yosef ibid states that after seeing the answer from heaven in Shut Min Hashamayim he retracted from ruling like the Michaber and would tell women to recite a blessing. He concludes that if the Michaber would have seen the Shut Min Hashamayim certainly he too would have retracted his ruling.

[3] So rule the following question regarding a man say the blessing for a woman, and the same logic should apply even more so regarding a woman saying on behalf of another woman: Shofar: Admur 589:2; 640:2 [Lulav]; Rama 589:6; Darkei Moshe 589:2; Havdala: Admur 296:19, in suspicion for 2nd opinion there; M”A 296:11; Elya Raba 296:18; Toras Chesed Teshuvos Hamafteichos; Beis Dovid 491;  M”B 296:36; Kaf Hachaim 296:54 based on Zechor Leavraham 1 Erech Havdala; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[4] See Admur 296:19 [Havdala]; 589:2 [Shofar]; 640:2 [Lulav]; Rama 589:6; Darkei Moshe 589:2; M”A 296:11; Elya Raba 296:18; Toras Chesed Teshuvos Hamafteichos; Beis Dovid 491;  M”B 296:36; Kaf Hachaim 296:54 based on Zechor Leavraham 1 Erech Havdala; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[5] The reason: Women who are not obligated in a command are likewise not commanded to say the blessing. Thus, a man has no obligation to recite the blessing for them to fulfill this optional Mitzvah. In such a case, if a man says the blessing for women it is considered a needless blessing and is hence defined as a blessing in vain. However, women themselves can choose to say the blessing for reasons explained in previous footnotes. [Admur 589:2] Vetzaruch Iyun as to how to understand this reason. Why can’t men say this optional blessing for women just like women can say it for themselves? In other words, if we permit an optional blessing for women why can’t we also permit it for men to say for the sake of women. Perhaps the reason is because since the blessing is optional and the man gains nothing for saying it [not even an exemption from Areivus], it is therefore considered an unnecessary blessing for him to say. However, women may say it being that she gains the fulfillment of the Mitzvah and hence it is not unnecessary. 

[6] See Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzlach Brachos 20b; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20; Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate

[7] Other opinions – The law of Areivus for women: There is a debate regarding the question if at all a person can be Motzi a woman if he or she already fulfilled his or her obligation, even if for certain both are obligated in the Mitzvah: See the following Poskim regarding a debate if women are included in the Mitzvah of Areivus, and can hence be Motzi others if they were already Yotzei: Rosh and Rabbeinu Yona Barchos 20b [no Areivus]; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797 [There is Areivus]; Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4 [questionable]; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzlach Brachos 20b [No Areivus]; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7 [There is Areivus]; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20 [Permitted]; The following Poskim all rule she is considered within Areivus: Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate; In 296 footnote 207 he concludes to initially be stringent

The law if she has yet to fulfill her obligation: In the event that the woman saying the blessing has yet to fulfill her own obligation and is doing so also on her own behalf, then everyone agrees that a man fulfills his obligation with hearing the blessing from her, as Shomeia Keoneh, and the concept of Areivus is only needed in a case that the person saying the blessing has already fulfilled their obligation. [See Admur 213:3; 8:11; 167:23; 197:6; M”A 167:40; 213:7]

[8] See for general rule: Admur 167:23; Terumas Hadeshen 140; See regarding Tzitzis: Admur 8:11; M”A 8:8; P”M 8 A”A 8; Tehila Ledavid 8:3; Kaf Hachaim 8:21; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 186:3; So rule regarding Kiddush: Admur  269:3; 271:4; 273:6; Michaber 273:4; M”B 273:17 Ketzos Hashulchan 81:4; 96:5; Kitzur Halachos Shabbos p. 114 and 164, 273:42 footnote 69; 296 footnote 32; SSH”K 51:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 273:5; Koveitz Hearos Ubiurim Tzemach Tzedek 7:87; Hearos Ubiurim Ohalei Torah 1024 p. 56; 1025 p. 65; 1026 p. 74; 1028 p. 79; So rule regarding Havdala: Admur 296:17; 297:8; Kuntrus Achron 272:2; So rule regarding Shofar: Admur 585:5; M”A 585:3 based on Terumas Hadeshen 140; Opinion in M”B 585:5; Machatzis Hashekel 585; P”M 585 A”A 3; Derech Hachaim 2 regarding Shofar; Mateh Efraim 585:6; Chayeh Adam 141:7; Kaf Hachaim 585:21; So rule regarding Chanukah: P”M 676 A”A 4; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeishev 6; Kaf Hachaim 675:9; [See however M”A 676:4 in name of Hagahos Maimanis and Kaf Hachaim 676:13 that one person can light and another can say the blessing, and they do not state that it’s better for the person to say the blessing rather than the emissary.] So rule regarding Megillah: Opinion in M”B 692:10; Kaf Hachaim 692:14 and 25; See Derech HaChaim 3; Minchas Yitzchak 3:53-54; Salmas Chaim 269; Luach Tukichinsky; Kinyan Torah 3:103; See Sdei Chemed R”R 2:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 692:7 that so is custom today

[9] See Admur 186:1 [Birchas Hamazon]; 271:6 [Kiddush]; 296:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:28; 186:1; See regarding Chanukah lighting: Michaber 675:3; M”A 675:4; Taz 675:4; Agudah; Bach; Kneses Hagedola; Levush; Olas Shabbos 675:1; Peri Chadash 675; Elya Raba 675:6; Shulchan Gavoa 675:6; Machazik Bracha 675:4; M”B 675:9; Kaf Hachaim 675:19

[10] M”B 675:9; Kaf Hachaim 675:20

Other opinions – The law of Areivus for women: There is a debate regarding the question if at all a person can be Motzi a woman if he or she already fulfilled his or her obligation, even if for certain both are obligated in the Mitzvah: See the following Poskim regarding a debate if women are included in the Mitzvah of Areivus, and can hence be Motzi others if they were already Yotzei: Rosh and Rabbeinu Yona Barchos 20b [no Areivus]; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797 [There is Areivus]; Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4 [questionable]; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzlach Brachos 20b [No Areivus]; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7 [There is Areivus]; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20 [Permitted]; The following Poskim all rule she is considered within Areivus: Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate; In 296 footnote 207 he concludes to initially be stringent

[11] See Brachos 20b and Sukkah 38a one whose wife says blessings for him, even though he is Yotzei, “A curse will befall his home.”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnotes 99-100See regarding Kiddush: Admur 271:6; Michaber 271:2; Kol Bo 31; M”A 271:2; Aguda Shavuos 9; Rav Poalim Sod Yesharim 3:6; M”B 271:4; See regarding Hallel: M”A 422:5; Kaf Hachaim 422:28; Biur Halacha 422:2 “Hallel”; Mishneh Sukkah 38a; Brachos 20b; Chanukah candles: Biur Halacha 675:2 “Isha”

On Rosh Chodesh Chanukah Half Kaddish is recited only after the reading of all four Aliyos. If Kaddish was accidentally recited in-between the 3^rd and 4^th Aliyah, some Poskim^[1] rule one is to repeat the Kaddish after the 4th Aliyah. Other Poskim^[2] however rule one is not to repeat it. [Practically, the Kaddish is to be repeated.]

________________________________

[1] P”M 684 A”A 4; Daas Torah 684 concludes one may recite Kaddish a second time; Igros Moshe 1:101; Piskeiy Teshuvos 490:4; See Elya Raba 669:19; Shaareiy Efraim 8:77; Imrei Eish 51; Kaf Hachaim 282:48

[2] Levush; Rosh; P”M 282 A”A 17; M”B 282:34; Shraga Hameir 3:14; Piskeiy Teshuvos 684:3-4; See M”A 684:4; Taz end of 684; Maharil 182; M”B 684:16; Kaf Hachaim 684:24

This is not accurate. Indeed, while it is true that by some of the instances that the song was sung during the Hasidic gatherings of the Rebbe, the above words were omitted, nonetheless it is equally true that there were occasions in which these words were sung as part of the song by the Rebbe, and hence we must conclude that there was no specific avoidance of the above words but simply an occasional omission. These words are repeated by the Rebbe in dozens of his talks and letters and hence it would be a great wonder to suggest that the Rebbe held that one should avoid saying these words.