משיב כהלכה - מאגר שאלות ותשובות
Country: ברזיל

Question

Perhaps the esteemed Rabbi could clarify a certain point in the ruling of Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef, shlit”a. In Yalkut Yosef, Shabbat I, siman 271, סעיף 5, he discusses the case of one who is uncertain whether he recited Kiddush over wine, and writes that if he has prayed, he should not recite Kiddush again, in keeping with the rule concerning doubtful blessings. At the end of that סעיף, he writes that if he has not yet prayed Ma’ariv, he should intend through his prayer to fulfill his obligation of Kiddush and should not recite Kiddush over wine because of the doubt concerning blessings. This is very difficult for me. After all, if it is certain to him that he has not prayed, then his uncertainty whether he recited Kiddush over wine is a doubt concerning a Torah obligation. Therefore, at the point in time in which he finds himself, he would seemingly be permitted to recite Kiddush over wine with a blessing, in accordance with the rule governing a doubt concerning a Torah obligation. After reciting Kiddush over wine, it is understood that he may also pray—not by virtue of the laws of Kiddush, but because of the obligation of prayer incumbent upon him. Thus, if he first recites Kiddush over wine and then prays, he would seemingly be free of all concern and would have done everything according to halachah. By contrast, if we instruct him to pray and intend thereby to fulfill his obligation of Kiddush, then according to the possibility that he had not previously recited Kiddush over wine, he has not fulfilled the mitzvah on the rabbinic level; and according to some of the early authorities, he has not even fulfilled the mitzvah on the Torah level, since in their view Kiddush over wine is a Torah obligation. Therefore, in my humble opinion, it would seem proper to rule in such a situation that he should first recite Kiddush over wine and then pray, yet Rabbi Yitzhak Yosef wrote the opposite. I would be grateful if the esteemed Rabbi could clarify this matter for me.

Answer

After wishing you a crown of life, peace, and every good forever: in my humble opinion, the resolution is simple and clear. Although we rule that a doubt concerning a Torah-level positive obligation overrides the concern of violating “You shall not take [God’s Name in vain]” (for three reasons, which I cannot presently elaborate upon due to lack of time), this is nevertheless only in the sense that it “overrides” it; it does not mean that the prohibition of taking God’s Name in vain has been “permitted.” Therefore, whenever there is a possibility of fulfilling the Torah obligation and reducing it to a rabbinic mitzvah, thereby avoiding the concern of taking God’s Name in vain, this is preferable. This is clear. [Rashi’s view that Kiddush over wine is a Torah obligation is nearly solitary in comparison with the view of Rambam and the overwhelming majority of halachic authorities, but this is not the place to elaborate.] I have been exceedingly brief due to a burden of pressing matters, and I beg your pardon, with due respect.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

PLEASE NOTE*

Attention: You should not learn from one case to another, each case must be analyzed individually. Generally speaking, it's always best to have contact with a Rabbi in person, not just virtual contact. Note that where there is a local Rabbi("Mara Deatra"), one should ask him. The answers are under the responsibility of the rabbi who responded, and not under the responsibility of the website and/or the Head of the Institution.

Advertise Here!
All proceeds are sacred To the Birkat Avraham organization. Also excellent charity, Advertising is also profitable for your business.

Didn't find an Answer?

Ask The Rabbi

Share us for friends

Last Articles

Smart Search Within the Site ×
Ask us to pray for you!

Contact Us

Office

צור קשר

מזכירות: