Daily Halacha Podcast - Daily Halacha By Rabbi Eli J. Mansour

The Or Zarua (Rav Yishak of Vienna, 13 th century) brings a Midrash that tells a remarkable story about Rabbi Akiba, who once saw a man running frantically while carrying a large stack of twigs. The man was unclothed, and his body was black like charcoal. Rabbi Akiba asked the man to stop, and offered to help. He assumed that this man was a slave working for a ruthless master, and he wanted to release him from his state of servitude so he would not have to continue suffering. The man explained to Rabbi Akiba that he actually was not from the world of the living. When he was alive, he worked as a tax collector, and he would heartlessly tax the needy into poverty while currying favor with the rich, among other grave misdeeds. His punishment was that he needed to collect firewood every day, to be then burned in the fire. The only chance to end this suffering, the man told Rabbi Akiba, was for his son to recite Kaddish or lead the recitation of Barechu in the synagogue. He had died when his wife was pregnant with their only child. Rabbi Akiba asked the man about his wife's name and place of residence, and he went to find this man's child. When he asked the townspeople about the widow and her child, they angrily cursed the deceased man who was so cruel and heartless, driving many people to destitution. Rabbi Akiba learned that the man had a son, but he was not even circumcised, and certainly never learned Torah such that he would be in a position to recite Kaddish. After finding the young man, Rabbi Akiba convinced him to have a berit mila . He tried teaching him Torah, but the young man had extreme difficulty learning. Rabbi Akiba fasted for forty days, beseeching G-d to help the boy learn. He was then able to teach him. Eventually, when the young man was ready, Rabbi Akiba brought him to the synagogue, and he recited Kaddish and Barechu. Rabbi Akiba continued teaching this young man Torah, until he emerged as a great scholar, known as Rabbi Nahum Ha'pakoli. The name "Ha'pakoli" alludes to the verse in the Book of Yeshayahu (28:7), "Paku Peliliya" – "He who extracts the guilty," which is precisely what Rabbi Nahum did, rescuing his sinful father from eternal suffering. The father appeared Rabbi Akiba in a dream and wished him that he be granted a distinguished place in Gan Eden. He explained that after his son recited Kaddish and Barechu, he was relieved of the suffering that had been decreed. When the son began learning Torah regularly, he was no longer subject to any punishment. And when the son was ordained as a Rabbi, he was brought to Gan Eden to join the Sadikim. This is an early source of the time-honored custom to recite Kaddish on behalf of one's deceased parent, which has the effect of sparing the parent from punishments in the afterlife. Another source is a passage in Tanna De'beh Eliyahu, brought by Rabbi Eliezer of Worms (Germany, d. 1238), which states that even a small child can save his father from the punishments of Gehinam through the recitation of Kaddish. Moreover, the Yad Eliyahu writes that by reciting Kaddish for a deceased parent, one fulfills the Misva of Kibbud Ab Va'em – honoring one's parent. In fact, the Yad Eliyahu adds, one has more of an opportunity to fulfill the Misva of Kibbud Ab Va'em after a parent's passing, since during the parent's lifetime, the parent can decline the child's offers to give honor. After the parent's passing, however, the parent cannot refuse the recitation of Kaddish – and even if the parent never requested that Kaddish be recited after his or her death, the child must assume that this was the parent's wish. As Kibbud Ab Va'em constitutes a Torah obligation, we follow the rule that one must act stringently in situations of uncertainty ("Safek De'Orayta Le'humra"), and thus a child must, under all circumstances, recite Kaddish for a deceased parent. Similarly, Rav Yosef Engel (1858-1919) writes that reciting Kaddish is the highest form of Kibbud Ab Va'em, as there is nothing greater that one can do for a parent than bring the parent to Gan Eden, which is what a child achieves by reciting Kaddish. Our community can be proud that this practice is meticulously observed, virtually without exception. Even when people travel, if they are in the first year after a parent's passing, Heaven forbid, they ensure to have a Minyan available so as not to miss even a single recitation of Kaddish. This is a testament to our community's awareness of the great importance of this cherished custom, and of our community's strong dedication to the precious Misva of Kibbud Ab Va'em. Importantly, however, Hacham Ovadia cites the Yosef Ometz as noting that the Kaddish recitation was instituted for those who are unable to benefit their parents' souls through the study of Torah. The benefit brought through Torah study is many times greater than the recitation of Kaddish, and if one arrives at a Hiddush (a novel Torah insight) while learning in his parent's memory, he brings immeasurable honor to the parent's soul in the afterlife. Therefore, as important as it of course is to recite Kaddish for a deceased parent, it is even more important to devote time to learn Torah in the parent's memory, as this is the greatest thing one can do for a deceased parent's soul. Many parents, understandably, are troubled by the exorbitant cost of Torah education. However, while the problem is real, and should be addressed, at the same time, we must maintain a proper perspective and realize that no matter how much money parents pay for their children to receive a Torah education, the dividends are infinitely greater. There is no price tag that one can place on eternal life in Gan Eden, and being spared the punishments of Gehinam. By providing their children with a proper religious education, parents ensure that their children will recite Kaddish and learn Torah in their memory, thereby guaranteeing their place in Gan Eden for all eternity – and we can all agree that there is no price too high for that.

The Kaddish text (specifically, "Kaddish Titkabal" and "Kaddish Yeheh Shelama") concludes with the famous prayer for peace: "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu Ve'al Kol Yisrael, Ve'imru Amen" – "He who makes peace in His high places shall bestow peace upon us and upon all Israel, and say: Amen." This prayer, as we know, also concludes the silent Amida and Birkat Ha'mazon, and for good reason – because the most important thing we can pray for is peace. The previous line in Kaddish also prays for peace ("Yeheh Shelama Rabba" – "May there be an abundance of peace…"), but the prayer of "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav" adds a particular element of our wishes for peace. We speak of Hashem bringing peace in the upper worlds ("Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav"), a reference to the peace and harmony that exists among the angels in heavens. These include an angel of water and angel of fire, which should, at first glance, be archrivals, and should be in a constant state of competition and tension. In truth, however, Hashem maintains the peace in the heavens – even among diametrically opposite forces. We thus pray that here on earth, too, we should have peace among different people, and among those with different opinions. Hashem specifically created the world such that no two people are the same. No two people think exactly alike, view things exactly alike, or have the exact same preferences, likes and dislikes. In the prayer of "Oseh Shalom," we ask Hashem to maintain the peace among people despite their differences, to help all of us live harmoniously with those who are unlike us. The Torah allows room – within certain limits, of course – for a wide range of different opinions and ideas, and we are encouraged to form opinions, but to show respect toward those who think differently than we do. It is no coincidence that just before we leave the synagogue, at the end of the final Kaddish, we recite the prayer of "Oseh Shalom," as we beseech G-d to help us as we go out and interact with many different kinds of people, to ensure that we can engage them peacefully and respectfully. It is customary during the Aseret Yemeh Teshuba (the ten-day period from Rosh Hashanah through Yom Kippur) to slightly emend the text at the end of "Kaddish Titkabal," by reciting "Oseh Ha'shalom" instead of "Oseh Shalom." Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that this change is made only in "Kaddish Titkabal" recited by the Hazzan after repeating the Amida – meaning, at Shaharit, Musaf and Minha, but not at Arbit. The reason for this change is that the Gematria of the word "Ha'shalom" is 381, and thus alludes to the angel "Safri-el" whose name equals this same number, and who is assigned the task of counting our merits during the High Holidays so we receive a favorable judgment. The Hazzan should try to have this in mind when reciting "Oseh Ha'shalom" at the end of Kaddish. However, although this is a proper practice, the Hazzan does not need to repeat this line if he mistakenly recited the usual text. (In fact, the word "Oseh" also equals 381, so this allusion is made even if the Hazzan forgets to recite "Ha'shalom.") Before reciting "Oseh Shalom," one should take three steps back, by first moving the left foot back such that the toes are aligned with the heel of the right foot, then moving the right foot such that the toes are aligned with the heel of the left foot, and finally moving the left back next to the right foot. One should then bow to the left and recite "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav," bow to the right and recite "Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu," and then bow to the center and recite "Ve'al Kol Yisrael." He should then rise and say, "Ve'imru Amen." Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868) asserted that the correct way to divide this sentence is to pause after the word "Shalom," and then recite "Alenu Ve'al Kol Yisrael." This is in contrast to the common practice to recite "Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu," and then "Ve'al Kol Yisrael." And the way we bow – bowing to the right for "Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu," and then bowing to the center for "Ve'al Kol Yisrael," as explained – seems more consistent with the conventional practice of pausing between "Alenu" and "Ve'al Kol." It seems that according to Rav Haim Palachi, when bowing to the center, one must pause after the word "Shalom," before saying "Alenu." Summary: Before reciting "Oseh Shalom," one should take three steps back, bow to the left and recite "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav," bow to the right and recite "Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu," and then bow to the center and recite "Ve'al Kol Yisrael." He should then rise and say, "Ve'imru Amen." During the period from Rosh Hashanah through Yom Kippur, the word "Shalom" in "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav" at the end of Kaddish is changed to "Ha'shalom." This change is made only by the Hazzan when he recites "Kaddish Titkabal" at Shaharit, Musaf and Minha.

In the "Kaddish Yeheh Shelama," which is recited by mourners at the end of the prayer service, we make twelve requests, asking for: "Shelama Rabba" (an abundance of peace), "Haim" (life), "Saba" (satiation), "Yeshua" (salvation), "Nehama" (consolation), "Shezaba" (protection), "Refua" (health), "Ge'ula" (redemption), "Seliha" (forgiveness), "Kapara" (atonement), "Revah" ("relief"), and "Hasala" (deliverance). These twelve requests correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel – which were founded by the twelve righteous sons of Yaakob Abinu – and we pray to Hashem to grant us these wishes in their merit. The word "Revah" (translated above as "relief") could also refer to material prosperity. The Arizal taught that the Name of G-d associated with Parnasa (livelihood) is Het-Tav-Chaf. This Name is alluded to in the verse "Pote'ah Et Yadecha U'masbia Le'chol Hai Rason" ("You open Your hand and wilfully satiate every living creature" – Tehillim 145:16), as the final letters of the words "Pote'ah et Yadecha" are Het, Tav and Chaf. These letters in Gematria equal 428 (8+400+20), which is twice the Gematria of the word "Revah" (200+6+8=214). In "Kaddish Yeheh Shelama," we say "Ve'revah" – with the letter Vav appearing before the word "Revah." Now Rashi (Bereshit 27:28) comments that the word "Ve'yiten" ("And He shall give") means that G-d should give and then give again ("Yiten Ve'yahazor Ve'yiten"). The word "Ve'revah," then, might also refer to a double blessing of "Revah" – or twice 214, for a total of 428. The word "Ve'revah," then, perhaps alludes to the special Name of Parnasa – Het-Tav-Chaf. This might be the reason why many have the custom to loudly exclaim "Ve'revah" during Kaddish – emphasizing the desire to access this special Name and thereby earn a comfortable livelihood.

In the "Kaddish De'Rabbanan" – known as "Kaddish Al Yisrael" – a special prayer is offered on behalf of the Torah scholars and their students. We pray for the wellbeing of the Rabbis, and for "Talmidihon Ve'al Talmideh Talmidehon" – "their students, and their students' students" – that is, for three generations of scholars. This parallels the verse in the Book of Yeshayahu (59:21) in which Hashem promises that the words of the Torah will not depart "from your mouth, from the mouth of your offspring, or from the mouth of your offspring's offspring." The Gemara derives from this verse that if three generations in a family study Torah, then Torah is guaranteed to remain in that family for all generations in the future. Correspondingly, we pray for the scholars, their students, and their students' students. We speak in this prayer of scholars "De'askin Be'Orayta Kadishta" – "who engage in the sacred Torah." Since the word "Orayta" (Torah) is a feminine noun, the adjective must likewise be in the feminine form – "Kadishta" – and not in the masculine form – "Kadisha." One must therefore ensure to recite "Kadishta," with the letter Tav. We emphasize that we pray for these blessings on behalf of scholars in this land and "Be'chol Atar Ve'atar" – in any place, no matter where they are. Some communities have the custom of reciting this phrase as "De'yatbin Ve'askin Be'Orayta Kadishta" – adding the word "De'yatbin" ("who sit…"). Although this is the practice among Moroccan and Tunisian communities, this is not the custom among Syrian Jews. Different versions exist for the phrase "Yeheh Lana U'lechon U'lehon" ("There shall be for us and for you and for them…"), as in some editions, the words "Lehon" and "Lechon" are reversed: "Yeheh Lana U'lehon U'lechon." Hacham Ovadia Yosef maintained that the correct text is "Yeheh Lana U'lechon U'lehon," as it is proper to first extend a blessing "to you" – to those who are present, and only then to others. We pray that Hashem should grant the scholars "Hina Ve'hisda Ve'rahameh" – "grace, kindness and compassion." The word "Hina" is Aramaic for the Hebrew word "Hen" ("grace"), which is sometimes translated as "charm." It denotes an intangible quality that some people have which leads others to like them and wish to deal kindly with them. In order to succeed in life, we need a degree of "Hen," a certain likeability that earns us people's favor and goodwill, and so we bless the scholars that they should not only receive Hashem's kindness and compassion, but also be granted "Hen." Some commentators explain that these three wishes – "Hina, Ve'hisda, Ve'rahameh" – correspond to Abraham, Yishak and Yaakob.

The Gemara posits the principle that "Yisrael Af Al Pi She'hata Yisrael Hu" – a Jew does not lose his status as a Jew even after he sins. As a general rule, then, a Jew who violates Torah law is nevertheless considered a full-fledged Jew in all respects. There are, however, a number of exceptions. One is a person who commits sins 'Le'ha'ch'is" – with the specific intention to anger G-d. If a person not only transgresses the Torah, but has decided to spitefully reject G-d, and he thus commits Torah transgressions out of anger and resentment – and not due to convenience, for money, or due a lack of self-discipline – then he forfeits his status as a Jew. Such a person, therefore, cannot be counted toward a Minyan. (A fascinating story is told of Rav Levi Yishak of Berditchev, who once saw a Jewish fellow whom he knew eating pork, and he wished him, "Bon Appetit," that he should enjoy it. He explained to his students that this individual suffered from a certain condition that resulted in pain in his stomach when he ate pork, but he nevertheless ate it out of hostility toward religion. Rav Levi Yishak extended to him the wish that he should eat it for the pleasure that it brings, and not out of resentment, so that he would at least retain his status as a Jew.) Another exception – which is far more common – is Shabbat desecration. Since Shabbat desecration is equated with idol-worship, a public Shabbat desecrator is, in certain respects, considered not Jewish. The Hafetz Haim explained this Halacha by way of an analogy to a person who walks by a store which is currently closed. If the sign is still up, then the person will likely assume that the store is still in business, and has closed only temporarily. Once, however, the sign has been taken down, the person will conclude that the store has closed permanently. The Torah refers to Shabbat as an "Ot," a "sign." As long as a person observes Shabbat, he demonstrates that he's "open for business," that he's still "in the game," as it were, even if in other ways he might falter. Therefore, a public Shabbat violator – in principle – is not considered a Jew with respect to certain Halachot, such as being counted toward a Minyan. This applies to public Shabbat violators regardless of the reason why they desecrate Shabbat – whether it's for ideological reasons, out of anger toward G-d, or because of convenience or an unwillingness to make the sacrifices that Shabbat observance requires. The Poskim dispute the question of how often one must publicly violate Shabbat to be disqualified from counting toward a Minyan. Some maintain that this disqualification applies only to habitual Shabbat violators, but others contend that even if a person publicly violated Shabbat just once, he cannot be counted toward a Minyan. This is the view accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef. It goes without saying that once a person has performed Teshuba and committed to Shabbat observance, he regains his status as a full-fledged Jew and may be counted. Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that one becomes disqualified only by publicly committing an act that is forbidden on Shabbat by force of Torah law. This includes driving, cooking, writing, and carrying in a public domain. If, however, a person publicly commits acts which are forbidden on Shabbat only by force of Rabbinic enactment, he may be counted toward a Minyan. The act of Shabbat desecration must be committed publicly – meaning, in the presence of ten men, the violator included. The Mishna Berura ruled that the act does not need to have been committed publicly, as even if it becomes known to ten people, this qualifies as a "public" act. Hacham Ovadia, however, disagrees, and rules that a person is not considered a public Shabbat violator unless he committed a forbidden act that was seen by ten men at the same time. (Incidentally, these conditions apply also with regard to the prohibition against drinking wine handled by a public Shabbat violator (unless the wine has been previously boiled). This applies only to somebody who committed an act of Shabbat desecration in the presence of ten men.) Hacham Ovadia made a very significant exception to this Halacha, addressing the situation of generally G-d-fearing Jews who work on Shabbat. It was quite common in certain periods that Jews would come to the synagogue, recite Kiddush and eat a Shabbat meal, but then go to work, succumbing to the anxiety of otherwise being unable to support their families. Hacham Ovadia ruled that although such people act incorrectly, nevertheless, since in their eyes, they violate Shabbat under duress, they are not considered intentional Shabbat violators. Hence, they may be counted toward a Minyan (and wine which they handled remains permissible). Additionally, the Mishna Berura writes that if a person violates Shabbat in public, but is too embarrassed to do so in the presence of a Rabbi, then he is not considered a public Shabbat violator with respect to this Halacha. The fact that he still experiences shame shows that he recognizes the sanctity of Shabbat, and so he does not attain the status of a flagrant desecrator who may not be counted toward a Minyan. However, Hacham Ovadia clarified that this applies only if we are certain that this individual would not desecrate Shabbat in view of his Rabbi. Much has been written about whether and how these Halachot apply in our generation. In the case of a person who was raised without a religious education, there is a general consensus that we apply the rule of "Tinok She'nishba" (literally, "an infant who was taken captive"), which excuses from liability a sinner who was never taught about Halachic observance. If someone was not taught to observe Shabbat as Halacha requires, then he is not held accountable for his failure to do so. As such, he does not have the status of a flagrant Shabbat desecrator. Some extend this rule further, asserting that even if a person learned about Shabbat, he cannot be considered a Shabbat desecrator if he was not made aware of the severity of Shabbat. There are people who received some level of Jewish education but their training was not grounded in Halacha, and they were thus never taught about the various Shabbat prohibitions and how they constitute capital offenses. These people, too, might not be considered flagrant Shabbat desecrators. An even more drastic view was advanced by the Hazon Ish (Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, 1878-1952). He contended that a person does not attain the status of a public Shabbat desecrator unless he was reprimanded for violating Shabbat and then ignored the rebuke he received. Effective criticism is a difficult art, a skill which the vast majority of people do not have in our time. As such, the Hazon Ish wrote, violators can be assumed to not have ever received proper rebuke for their acts of desecration, and they therefore do not have the status of public Shabbat desecrators. This novel ruling of the Hazon Ish should seemingly allow any Shabbat violator to be counted toward a Minyan nowadays, given the assumption that proper rebuke was never administered. However, Rav Yisrael Bitan noted that one might question this conclusion, in light of the fact that technology has made knowledge about Torah law readily available to all, and, moreover, there are many Jews who were raised in Torah homes and received a proper religious education, and then decided to abandon halachic observance. It seems difficult to exclude such people from the category of intentional Shabbat desecrators. Rabbi Bitan therefore concludes that every community Rabbi must determine the policy for his congregation, given the different opinions that exist and different realities in each community. It must be emphasized that we speak here only of being counted toward the minimum quorum of ten men. By no means does Halacha disallow a Shabbat violator from entering a synagogue and participating in the Minyan. Personally, I went into the rabbinate specifically for such Jews, to help Jews grow in their observance, each on their level and in a way that suits them, irrespective of one's current level of commitment. Those who do not properly observe Shabbat should be at least as welcome in the synagogue as fully-observant Jews, if not more so. I am reminded of a story told by Hacham Baruch Ben-Haim of a person who once came to pray in Congregation Shaare Zion and was given an Aliya, and afterward, somebody else approached Hacham Baruch to object. He said that he knew for a fact that this individual who was given an Aliya regularly shaved with a razor – a strict Torah violation – and thus should not be given the honor of being called to the Torah. "Let me tell you a story," Hacham Baruch replied. "Many years ago, there was somebody who came to shul who was not at all serious about Halachic observance. We welcomed him very warmly, and gave him an Aliya. There were those who objected and were angry at me. But gradually, this fellow became more involved, attending prayers and classes, and building a relationship with me and other Rabbis. He ended up raising a fully observant home, and all his children are strictly observant. "As it so happens," the Hacham continued, "that man was your father. You would not be in the synagogue today if I had followed the policy you are advocating." This should be our attitude toward our fellow Jews who are not as observant as we would want. While there is some question about whether or not they may be counted toward the minimum required amount of ten men, and, as we saw, different opinions exist, there is no question about whether they should be warmly welcomed in our synagogues. Our institutions must be inviting for all Jews, regardless of their level of observance, so everyone can grow in a way and at a pace that is appropriate for them.

Whereas some Kaddishim end with "Da'amiran Be'alma Ve'imru Amen," others consist of additional prayers and conclude with "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav…" Is the one reciting Kaddish required to take three steps back for "Oseh Shalom" at the end of Kaddish, as we do for "Oseh Shalom" at the end of the Amida? The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his Od Yosef Hai, distinguished in this regard between the "Kaddish Titkabal" that the Hazzan recites following the repetition of the Amida, and other Kaddishim. For the Hazzan reciting "Kaddish Titkabal," the Ben Ish Hai writes, taking three steps back is required, because he needs to step back after repeating the Amida. When reciting the other Kaddishim, however, this is not necessary. The Ben Ish Hai cites this ruling in the name of earlier Poskim (Shalmeh Sibur, Mateh Yehuda). This is the view also of the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939), who observed that this was the common practice, adding that this is consistent with the teachings of Kabbalah. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, disagreed, and ruled that it is proper to step back for "Oseh Shalom" at the end of every Kaddish. He refuted the Kaf Ha'haim's claim that Kabbalistic teaching does not require stepping back, noting that Rav Eliyahu Hamwe of Aleppo (1839-1915), a great Kabbalist, writes in his Peh Eliyahu that one must step back at the end of every Kaddish. Moreover, the Radbaz (Rav David Ben Zimra, Egypt, 1479-1573) maintained that one should take three steps back at the end of every Kaddish, and this is also the position of Maran, in Bet Yosef and Shulhan Aruch. Therefore, whenever one recites a Kaddish that ends with "Oseh Shalom," he should take three steps back. The proper procedure is to move the left foot back, then move the right foot behind the left foot, and then move the left foot next to the right foot. One then recites the words "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav" while bowing to the left, "Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Alenu" while bowing to the right, and "Ve'al Kol Yisrael" while bowing frontward. He then stands upright for "Ve'imru Amen."

Our community's practice is to recite in Kaddish Titkabal the phrase "Kodam Abuna De'bi'shmaya Ve'ar'a" – asking that our prayers be accepted "before our Father who is in the heavens and the earth." Hacham Ovadia Yosef was of the opinion that this text is incorrect, as the word "Ve'ar'a" ("and the earth") does not belong. Several Rishonim omit this word from their text of the Kaddish, and, moreover, we cannot speak of G-d as our "Father on earth," as every person already has a father here on earth. Hashem is our Father in the heavens, in addition to our father here on earth. All Siddurim that bear a Haskama (letter of approval) by Hacham Ovadia omit the word "Ve'ar'a." Nevertheless, the custom among the communities in Aleppo, Syria was always to include the word "Ve'ar'a," and the work Yosef Haim justified the legitimacy of this text. Therefore, it is proper for Syrian Jews who follow the customs of Aleppo to add the word "Ve'ar'a." I am reminded of the time when, as a youngster, I became aware of Hacham Ovadia Yosef's ruling that the Beracha of "La'minim" in the Amida prayer should conclude with the words "U'machni'a Zedim," as opposed to the text which is customarily used in our community – "U'machni'a Minim." Hacham Ovadia advanced several compelling proofs to his ruling, and so I figured that this is the correct text. When I served as Hazzan in the synagogue, I recited "Zedim" in accordance with Hacham Ovadia's ruling. Hacham Baruch Ben-Haim approached me afterward and asked why I had changed the word from "Minim" to "Zedim," and I explained to him that I thought I should follow Hacham Ovadia's view. The Hacham reprimanded me, noting that notwithstanding Hacham Ovadia's ruling, it is improper to change the text that has been used in our community for generations. With regard to "Ve'ar'a," too, given the longstanding tradition among Syrian Jews to include this word in Kaddish, this is the custom that our community should follow. Summary: The custom in our community is to recite in Kaddish Titkabal the phrase "Kodam Abuna De'bi'shmaya Ve'ar'a," including the word "Ve'ar'a."

The Hazzan recites a special Kaddish after the Amida (or the repetition of the Amida) known as Kaddish Titkabal. Following the basic Kaddish text (which ends with "Da'amiran Be'alma"), the Hazzan adds a request that the congregation's prayers should be accepted along with those of the entire Jewish Nation: "Titkabal Selotana U'ba'utana Im Selot'hon U'ba'ut'hon De'chol Bet Yisrael…" The Hazzan mentions the prayers of the entire nation in fulfillment of the Gemara's teaching in Masechet Berachot (30a) that when a person prays, he should pray not as a lone individual, but rather as part of the entire nation. A person himself may not be worthy of having his prayers accepted, but when he joins with all Am Yisrael, he accesses the collective merit of the nation, including the merits of the great Sadikim, and this helps ensure the acceptance of his prayers. We therefore ask not only that G-d accept our prayers, but also that He accept the prayers of the entire Jewish Nation. We can perhaps gain further insight into the expression "Selotana U'ba'utana" – literally, "our prayers and our requests" – from the Targum Onkelos translation to a verse in Parashat Vayehi (Bereshit 48:22). Yaakob Abinu recalls how he seized the city of Shechem from his enemies "Be'harbi U'b'kashti" – "with my sword and with my bow." Targum Onkelos, interestingly enough, translates these words as "Bi'sloti U'b'ba'uti" – "with my prayer and with my request." It was clear to Yaakob that although he waged war, his success in vanquishing the enemy resulted not from his weapons, but rather from his prayers to G-d. It is also significant that Yaakob viewed Tefila as his "ammunition," as the weapons with which he defeated those who threatened him. Exploring Oneklos' translation more closely, the "sword" and the "bow" are used here as metaphors for two kinds of prayer – "Seloti" and "Ba'uti." The commentators explain that whereas a sword is used in close combat, when the enemy is right in front of the soldier, the bow is used to target enemies stationed at a distance. Correspondingly, then, "Selotana" and "Ba'utana refer to two different kinds of Tefila. Sometimes we pray like a sword – to address an immediate need, such in the case of an illness. Other times, however, we pray in the form of a bow – beseeching G-d to protect us from distant threat, from future dangers. When the Hazzan recites, "Titkabal Selotana U'ba'utana," he asks that all our prayers should be mercifully accepted – our prayers for our immediate needs, as well as our prayers for the future.

In the phrase in Kaddish "Yitbarach Ve'yishtabah Ve'yitpa'ar…" the word "Ve'yishtabah" begins a series of seven words that consist of six letters each, for a total of 42 letters. This phrase thus alludes to the special "Shem Mem-Bet" – the 42-letter Name of G-d, which has special significance. If we add the other three words of praise in Kaddish – "Yitgadal," "Ve'yitkadash," and "Yitbarach," we arrive at a total of ten expressions of praise, which parallel the ten utterances with which Hashem created the universe. These ten pronouncements later found expression in the declaration of the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai. The people heard the first two commandments from G-d, whereas the other eight were told only to Moshe who then conveyed them to the people. Accordingly, the ten expressions of praise in Kaddish are separated into two series: the two expressions of "Yitgadal" and "Ve'yitkadash" at the beginning of Kaddish, and the eight expressions from "Yitbarach" through "Ve'yit'halal," which appear later. The Peri Hadash (Rav Hizkiya Da Silva, 1659-1698) writes that these ten expressions of praise correspond to the ten different terms that King David used in Tehillim when praising Hashem (e.g. Nisu'ah, Niggun, Shir, Mizmor).

When reciting in Kaddish the words "Le'ela Min Kol Birchata Ve'shirata," one should ensure to recite "Min Kol" as two words, as opposed to "Mi'kol." The "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response – which, according to our custom, continues through the word "De'alma" – must consist of 28 words, and if one recites "Mi'kol" instead of "Min Kol," he ends up with only 27 words. Rav Shmuel Vital (1598-1677) held a different view, asserting that the expression "Min Kol" is grammatically incorrect. He thus maintained that the proper text is "Mi'kol," and that the word "Ve'imru" after "Da'amiran Be'alma" counts as the 28 th word. The consensus opinion, however, is that the correct text is "Min Kol," as "Ve'imru" cannot count toward the required number of words. The custom among Ashkenazim is to substitute "Min Kol" with "Mi'kol" during the Aseret Yemeh Teshuba (Ten Days of Repentance), from Rosh Hashanah through Yom Kippur. They do so because their practice is to repeat the word "Le'ela" during this period, resulting in 29 words. The words "Min Kol" are thus replaced with "Mi'kol" to keep the total number at 28. They end up reciting, "Le'ela Le'ela Mi'kol Birchata…" Sepharadim, however, do not follow this custom. According to some Poskim, a Sepharadi who prays in an Ashkenazic Minyan during the Aseret Yemeh Teshuba should follow the Ashkenazic custom and recite "Le'ela Le'ela Mi'kol Birchata." Toward the end of the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response, we mention the word "Tishbehata." Our custom is to pronounce this word "Tishbehata," and not "Tushbehata." The word after "Tishbehata" is "Nehemata," which means "consolation." The explanation is that G-d is in mourning, as it were, during the Jewish People's period of exile. He grieves, so-to-speak, over the fact that we lost the Bet Ha'mikdash, were driven from our homeland, and have been dispersed among the other nations. We therefore wish the Almighty "consolation" with the rebuilding of the Bet Ha'mikdash and our return to our land. Summary: When reciting in Kaddish the words "Le'ela Min Kol Birchata Ve'shirata," one should ensure to recite "Min Kol" as two words, as opposed to "Mi'kol." Ashkenazim have the custom to change this phrase during the Aseret Yemeh Teshuba (reciting "Le'ela Le'ela Mi'kol…"), but this is not the practice among Sepharadim. Our custom is to recite "Tishbehata," and not "Tushbehata."

Different customs exist regarding the phrase "Le'alam U'l'almeh Almaya" in the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response to Kaddish. Some recite this phrase this way, whereas others omit the letter Vav from "U'l'almeh" and recite simply "Le'almeh." The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his work Od Yosef Hai, writes that the word should be pronounced "Le'almeh," without the letter Vav at the beginning. He explains that the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response is meant to consist of 28 letters, and if the Vav is included, this response consists of 29 letters. Therefore, the Vav must be omitted. This is the position also of the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). This argument assumes that the word "Shemeh" in "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" is spelled with a Yod (Shin, Mem, Yod, Heh). In some Siddurim, this word is spelled without the letter Yod, thus allowing for the Vav to be included in "U'l'almeh" without exceeding 28 letters. It is true that, as discussed in a previous installment, the Mahzor Vitri understood the phrase "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" as a prayer that the divine Name, which currently contains only the letters Yod and Heh, should become complete, and according to this reading, the word "Shemeh" is read as "Shem Yod-Heh" ("the Name of Yod-Heh"). However, as we saw, Halacha does not follow this opinion, and therefore it is acceptable to omit the letter Yod from the word "Shemeh." Moreover, Hacham Ovadia Yosef noted that Maran (author of the Shulhan Aruch), in Bet Yosef, clearly follows the opinion that the correct text is "U'l'almeh," and this is how the word appears in the texts of earlier Rabbis such as Rav Saadia Gaon, Rav Amram Gaon, the Rambam, and others. Hacham Ovadia asserts that in light of these sources, a Kabbalistic teaching involving the significance of the number 28 does not justify altering the text. By contrast, Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025), who was a renowned expert in grammar, maintained that the correct text is "Le'almeh." Rav Moshe Rahamim Shayo (contemporary), in his Mehkereh Aretz, writes that in the Bet Obed edition of the Siddur, which was used by the Jewish communities of Aleppo, Syria, the text reads "Le'almeh," without the letter Vav. This text also appears in the Siddur published by Rav Abraham Hamway, and this was the ruling of Rav Yeshayahu Dayan (1833-1903), head of Aleppo's Rabbinical court. There is also testimony that later, in the times of Aleppo's Chief Rabbi Moshe Mizrahi (1863-1955), Rav Mizrahi sharply reprimanded a member of the community who recited "U'l'almeh" instead of the "Le'almeh," which was the accepted custom in Aleppo. In the Kol Yaakob edition of the Siddur, which is used by many Syrian Jews, the word appears as "U'l'almeh," but this is a mistake, as the custom in Aleppo was clearly to say "Le'almeh." In practice, therefore, it is proper for members of the Syrian community to recite "Le'almeh," and not "U'l'almeh." Summary: In the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response to Kaddish, the word "Le'almeh" appears this way in some editions of the Siddur, and in others, "U'l'almeh," with the letter Vav at the beginning. The text that should be followed by members of the Syrian community is "Le'almeh."

The Poskim address the question as to the proper pronunciation of the word "Shemeh" in the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response to Kaddish – whether or not the Heh at the end of the word has a Dagesh (dot), which would turn it into a "Mapik Heh." Whereas a regular Heh at the end of the word is silent, a "Mapik Heh" is pronounced as an "H" sound. Does one pronounce the Heh at the end of "Shemeh" as a "Mapik Heh," or as a silent Heh? Some Poskim assert that this question hinges on the interpretation of the phrase "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach." As discussed in an earlier installment in this series, the simple interpretation of this phrase is "May the great Name be blessed." The Mahzor Vitri, however, explained that in this response, we pray that the Name of G-d, which, in our current state of exile, has only two letters – Yod and Heh – should become "Rabba" – great. According to this reading, the word "Shemeh" actually means "Shem Yod-Heh" (the Name of Yod-Heh), in which case the Heh at the end of the word must be pronounced as a "Mapik Heh." According to the first understanding, however, the Heh is silent. If so, then since we accept the first reading, it would seem that we should say "Shemeh" with a silent Heh at the end. However, other Poskim disagree, and claim that according to both interpretations of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," the rules of Hebrew grammar dictate that the Heh at the end "Shemeh" receives a Dagesh. This is the view accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef. In practice, therefore, one should pronounce "Shemeh" with a "Mapik Heh" at the end, with an "H" sound. When responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach," one must ensure to say "Mebarach" and not "Meborach." In Hebrew, the word for "blessed" is "Meborach," but in Aramaic – the language of the Kaddish text – the word is "Mebarach." Summary: When responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach" to Kaddish, the word "Shemeh" should be pronounced with a "Mapik Heh" at the end – meaning, the Heh at the end of the word should be expressed with an "H" sound. One must ensure to say "Mebarach" and not "Meborach."

The simple interpretation of the phrase "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach" – which we respond to Kaddish – is "May the Great Name be blessed." Meaning, we declare that "Shemeh Rabba" – G-d's great Name – shall be blessed and glorified. Tosafot (Berachot 3a) cite this interpretation in the name of Rabbenu Yishak. However, Tosafot also bring a different interpretation of this phrase, in the name of the Mahzor Vitri, according to which this phrase actually consists of two separate proclamations. First, we declare that "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" – that G-d's Name shall be great, or complete, and we then add that it should be blessed forever ("Mebarach Le'alam…"). The concept underlying this second explanation is that G-d's Name is "incomplete" in our nation's state of exile. G-d's complete Name consists of four letters – Yod, Heh, Vav and Heh – but when the Jewish People are in exile, His Name is compromised, consisting of only Yod and Heh. This is indicated by G-d's pronouncement after Beneh Yisrael's first battle against Amalek: "Ki Yad Al Kes Y-ah" (Shemot 17:16). As long as Amalek exists, Hashem's Name is only "Y-ah," missing the final two letters, Vav and Heh. For the same reason, G-d refers in this verse to His throne with the word "Kes," a shortened version of the word "Kiseh," indicating the incompletion of His reign, so-to-speak, due to the presence of evil in the world. The Maharsha (Rav Shmuel Eidels, 1555-1631) explains on this basis the verse in Tehillim (132:13) which we recite each morning, "KI Bahar Hashem Be'Sion, Iva Le'moshab Lo" (literally, "For G-d has chosen Zion, desiring it as His abode"). This means that when Hashem will choose to return to Zion, with the rebuilding of the Bet Ha'mikdash, then "Iva" – the letters Alef, Vav and Heh – will be restored to their rightful place ("Le'moshab"). The missing Alef of the word "Kiseh," and the Vav and Heh missing from Hashem's Name, will finally return. Similarly, we recite each morning after Shema, "Hu Kayam U'shemo Kayam Ve'chis'o Nachon" – "He exists, His Name exists, and His throne is firmly set in place." Rav Shlomo Amar explains this to mean that when "Hu Kayam" – the letters Heh and Vav will come back, then "Shemo Kayam" – Hashem's Name will again be complete, and "Ve'chis'o Nachon" – His throne will be complete, as well. This notion is alluded to also in the prayer added by Ashkenazim to Birkat Ha'mazon: "Ha'Rahaman Hu Yishlah Lanu Et Eliyahu Ha'nabi" – "The Compassionate One – He will send us Eliyahu the prophet." When Eliyahu comes, "Hu" – the letters Heh and Vav – will be restored. Another allusion to this concept appears in the final verse in Tehillim: "Kol Ha'neshama Tehalel Ya-ah" – "Every soul shall praise Y-ah." The word "He'neshama" ("the soul") can be punctuated differently such that it means "the desolation." This verse thus implies that in the current state of "desolation," in the absence of the Bet Ha'mikdash, we can praise only "Y-ah," as Hashem's Name remains incomplete. According to this second interpretation of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach," we are praying that "Shemeh" – a contraction of the words "Shem" and "Y-ah," referring to the incomplete Name – shall be made "Rabba," complete, and, additionally, His Name should be blessed ("Mebarach"). Incidentally, the word "Yitgadal" consists of five letters, and the word "Ve'yitkadash" consists of six letters. These two words thus represent the letters Heh and Vav, which, respectively, equal in Gematria 5 and 6. We pray through the recitation of these words that G-d's Name should be glorified through the restoration of the missing Vav and Heh. According to this second opinion, when reciting "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach," one should pause slightly between the words "Shemeh" and "Rabba," as this is a prayer that the Name ("Shemeh") should become great ("Rabba"), and the word "Rabba" is thus not describing the word "Shemeh." The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) cites the Arizal as concurring with this view of the Mahzor Vitri. However, as Hacham Ovadia Yosef cites, Tosafot challenged this reading in light of the Gemara's comment (there in Berachot) that speaks of Jews proclaiming in the synagogue, "Yeheh Shemeh Ha'gadol Meborach" ("May His great Name be blessed") – which clearly indicates that we are declaring that the great Name shall be blessed, as Rabbenu Yishak explained. Moreover, Rav Yisrael Bitan notes that the Ben Ish Hai elsewhere brings Rabbenu Yishak's understanding, and ruled that one should therefore not pause between the words "Shemeh" and "Rabba." This is, indeed, the correct practice to follow. Summary: The accepted interpretation of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba Mebarach" is "May the Great Name be blessed." One should recite these words without any pause in between the words "Shemeh" and "Rabba."

One who recites Kaddish must ensure while saying the phrase "Be'alma Di Bera" to pronounce "Di Bera" as two separate words. If one recites this phrase too quickly, he will end up saying, "Dibera," as one word, which is incorrect. He must be careful to recite two separate words – "Di" and "Bera." Different opinions exist regarding the pronunciation of the word "Chi'r'uteh" in the phrase "Be'alma Di Bera Chi'r'uteh," as according to some views, the letter Chaf has a Dagesh (dot), such that it should be pronounced "Ki'r'uteh." The debate hinges on how to read this phrase. The basic rule is that when any of the letters Bet, Gimmel, Dalet, Kaf, Peh or Tav appears at the beginning of the word, it receives a Dagesh. The exception to this rule is when the preceding word ends with an Alef, Heh, Vav or Yod, in which case the word does not receive a Dagesh. In the case of "Chi'r'uteh," then, it would seem that since the previous word ("Bera") ends with the letter Alef, the Chaf at the beginning of "Chi'r'uteh" should remain without a Dagesh, and thus be pronounced "Chi'r'uteh." Indeed, this is how the word is punctuated in many editions of the Siddur. However, Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that the more correct pronunciation is "Ki'r'uteh." He explained that although the previous word ends with an Alef, that word – "Bera" – is not connected to the word "Ki'r'uteh." The word "Ki'r'uteh" means "in accordance with His will," and Hacham Ovadia explained, based on a passage in Masechet Sofrim, that this word modifies not the immediately preceding words, but rather the beginning of Kaddish, when we pray for G-d's Name to be glorified. We pray that His Name should be sanctified and praised "Ki'r'uteh" – in fulfillment of His will. Hence, the word "Ki'r'uteh" stands separate and apart from the words "Di Bera," and so the Heh at the end of the word "Bera" does not affect the letter Chaf at the beginning of the word "Ki'r'uteh." We thus apply the standard rule that a Chaf at the beginning of a word receives a Dagesh, such that the word should be pronounced "Ki'r'uteh." Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) disputed Hacham Ovadia's position. He noted that the Abudarham (Spain, 14 th century) interpreted "Di Bera Chi'r'uteh" to mean, "that He created in accordance with His will." According to this reading, the word "Chi'r'uteh" indeed modifies the immediately preceding words – "Di Bera," such that the letter Chaf should not receive a Dagesh. Rav Mazuz conceded, however, that the passage in Masechet Sofrim indeed implies that "Chi'r'uteh" modifies the earlier part of the sentence, and not the words "Di Bera." In practice, different customs exist. Tunisian communities pronounce the word "Ki'r'uteh," whereas the custom among the communities in Aleppo, Syria was to pronounce it "Chi'r'uteh." Rav Yisrael Bitan writes that Hacham Ovadia, despite preferring the pronunciation of "Ki'r'uteh," acknowledged that those who pronounce it "Chi'r'uteh" have a legitimate basis for this practice. Therefore, each community should follow its custom. Summary: One who recites Kaddish must ensure while saying the phrase "Be'alma Di Bera" to pronounce "Di Bera" as two separate words, and not as one word ("Dibera"). Different customs exist regarding the next word – "Chi'r'uteh," as some pronounce the word this way, and others pronounce it "Ki'r'uteh." Each community should follow its custom.

When one responds, "Amen Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish, he must ensure to pause between "Amen" and "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." The word "Amen" is a response to the prayer that the Hazzan had just said – that G-d's Name should be glorified and praised throughout the world. The words "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba…" constitute a separate proclamation, and are not a direct continuation of the "Amen" response. Therefore, one must pause briefly after responding "Amen," before declaring, "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba…"

April 21 first The custom among many Ashkenazim is to pronounce the first two words of Kaddish as "Yitgadel Ve'yitkadesh." This follows the ruling of the Mishna Berura, who maintained that these words are Hebrew, not Aramaic, such that they should be pronounced "Yitgadel Ve'yitkadesh," with the Sereh vowel underneath the Dalet in both words. However, Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) noted that in ancient sources, these words appear in the Aramaic form – "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash," with a Patah vowel, and so this is the proper pronunciation. This is, indeed, the custom among Sepharadim. When reciting the word "Yitgadal," one must ensure to pronounce the Gimmel properly, and not as a Kuf, as though reciting "Yitkadal," a word that means something very different from "Yitgadal." Furthermore, one must make a point to pronounce the Dalet properly, so the word does not sound like "Yitkatal," with a Tav.

Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that when one recites Kaddish, it is proper for him to keep his feet together, just as we do when reciting the Amida and Nakdishach. The reason for this practice is to resemble the angels, who have but one leg. Certainly, one should not be walking about while reciting Kaddish. The Kav Ha'yashar (Rav Tzvi Hersh Kaidanover, Germany, d. 1712) writes that even those who are listening to Kaddish should keep their feet together in their seats. However, this was said only as a measure of extra piety, and not as an actual requirement. It is customary when reciting Kaddish to face toward Jerusalem, just as when reciting the Amida. Strictly speaking, however, this is not necessary. Therefore, when Kaddish is recited in a cemetery, and it is difficult to determine the direction of Jerusalem, one may face whichever direction he wishes.

The Shulhan Aruch writes that one who recites Kaddish should bow at five points during the recitation: the first word, "Yitgadal"; "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba"; "Yitbarach"; "Berich Hu"; "Ve'imru Amen" after "Da'amiran Be'alma." Some have the custom to bow also while reciting "Ve'imru Amen" before "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." A number of Poskim, including Rav Haim Palachi (Turkey, 1788-1868) and the Kaf Ha'haim Sofer (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939), cite the Yad Aharon as ruling that one should now each time he says the word "Amen" during Kaddish. It is recorded (in the work Neveh Shalom) that this was the custom in Cairo, and this is the position taken by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Od Yosef Hai. By contrast, the Ish Masliah (Rav Masliah Mazuz, 1911-1971) claimed that this custom has no Halachic basis, and should not be followed. This is the opinion accepted by Hacham David Yosed, in Halacha Berura, writing that one should bow only at the five points mentioned by the Shulhan Aruch. In contrast to all these views, the Gaon of Vilna (Rav Eliyahu of Vilna, 1720-1797) ruled that one should not bow at all during Kaddish. The accepted custom among Sepharadim, however, is to bow at the five points mentioned by the Shulhan Aruch, and some bow also while reciting "Ve'imru Amen" before "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," as mentioned. It is customary to turn to the sides when reciting the words "Be'hayechon U'b'yomechon." This is done as a sign of affection for the congregation, as these words express the wish that Hashem's Name should be glorified with the coming of Mashiah "in your lives and in your days" – during the lifetime of the members of the congregation. Summary: Different customs exist when it comes to bowing during the recitation of Kaddish. The accepted custom among Sepharadim is to bow at the five points mentioned by the Shulhan Aruch, and some bow also while reciting "Ve'imru Amen" before "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba."

There are those who have the practice to rise for Barechu, though this is not the generally accepted custom among Sepharadim. An exception is the recitation of Barechu on Friday night, when many Sepharadim are accustomed to standing, following the teachings of Kabbalah. Some have the custom to momentarily lift themselves off their seats when responding "Baruch Hashem Ha'meborach Le'olam Va'ed" to the Hazzan's declaration of Barechu. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes in his Od Yosef Hai that this was the common practice in Baghdad. He adds, however, that there seems to be no basis for such a practice in the Halachic sources. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998) opposed this custom, and ruled that one should simply remain seated without moving when responding to Barechu, without moving at all. He explained that it is improper to bow on occasions when there is no Halachic requirement to do so, as this undermines the significance of this gesture. Therefore, as there is no Halachic basis for bowing when responding to Barechu, this should not be done. Summary: Some have the custom to slightly lift their bodies off their seats when responding to Barechu, but some Poskim discourage this practice.

It is well-known that one may not walk in front of somebody while he recites the Amida. Is it similarly forbidden to walk in front of somebody while he recites Kaddish? The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his Birkeh Yosef, references a manuscript written by Rav Yaakob Molcho (Jerusalem, 17 th century) stating that it is forbidden to walk in front of somebody reciting Kaddish. This ruling is cited later approvingly by both the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) and Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer (Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939). The reason is that passing in front of the person can easily cause him to be distracted and lose concentration. Hacham Ovadia Yosef clarified that this applies only through the recitation of "Da'amiran Be'alma Ve'imru Amen." The rest of Kaddish was added later, and is thus treated more leniently. Hence, it is permissible to walk in front of somebody while he recites these additions. Unlike in the case of somebody reciting the Amida, it is permissible to sit within four Amot of somebody reciting Kaddish. The reason, as explained by Hacham Ovadia Yosef, is that one does not disrespect the recitation of Kaddish by sitting next to the person, since he responds to the Kaddish recitation. Halacha forbids sitting near a person reciting the Amida because this disrespects the recitation; in the case of Kaddish, however, one is actively participating by responding to the Kaddish, such that there is no display of disrespect, and so this is allowed. Summary: It is forbidden to walk in front of somebody while he recites the main body of Kaddish – from the beginning until "Da'amiran Be'alma Ve'imru Amen." One is allowed to sit near somebody who is reciting Kaddish.

The Rambam writes that Matanot La'ebyonim – giving charity to the poor on Purim – is the most important of all the Purim obligations. If a person has a limited budget, he should prioritize Matanot La'ebyonim and allocate more for this purpose than for the Purim feast and Mishloah Manot. The reason, the Rambam explains, is that there is no greater joy than lifting the spirits of those who struggle. This Misva brings joy to the recipient, to the donor, and also to the Shechina, as it were. The Ba'al Ha'maor (Rav Zerahya Ha'levi, Provence, 12 th century) cites the ruling of Rabbenu Efrayim (late 11 th -early 12 th century) that Matanot La'ebyonim must be given to the poor specifically on Purim day. In ancient times, villages were allowed under certain circumstances to read the Megilla earlier – on the 11 th , 12 th , or 13 th of Adar. Nevertheless, Rabbenu Efrayim ruled, even when the Megilla was read earlier, the gifts to the poor needed to be given on Purim day – the 14 th of Adar. This money, Rabbenu Efrayim explained, is given for the purpose of helping the needy enjoy a Purim feast. If one gives charity before Purim, the money might be spent before Purim. Therefore, while it is of course always a great Misva to assist the needy, the particular Misva of Matanot La'ebyonim – which is geared toward helping the poor properly celebrate Purim – can be fulfilled only on Purim day itself. This position is cited as Halacha by the Shulhan Aruch as well as later Poskim. The Peri Megadim (Rav Yosef Teomim, 1727-1792) maintained that one may give Matanot La'ebyonim on the night of Purim, as by then, one can be certain that the money will be spent on food for Purim day. However, the Shulhan Aruch and later Poskim maintain that the money should be given on Purim day, and not the previous night. It is common to fulfill this Misva by giving money to a Rabbi before Purim and appointing him as one's "agent" to distribute the funds to the needy on Purim. Many people are not likely to encounter a needy person on Purim itself, so they instead give the money to a Rabbi who knows those in need of assistance, so he can give it to them on Purim day. If one who does not live in Jerusalem gives the money to a Rabbi who will distribute the funds in Jerusalem on the 15 th of Adar – when Purim is celebrated in Jerusalem – then he does not fulfill the Misva, because he must give charity on the day that he observes as Purim (the 14 th of Adar). While the preferred manner of fulfilling this obligation is by giving cash, one satisfies his requirement also by writing a check and giving it to a needy person. Since the recipient can take the check to the bank and receive cash to be used for purchasing food, this qualifies as Matanot La'ebyonim. Even if Purim falls on Sunday, when banks are closed, the recipient can sign the check and give it to the casher in a store, or to a friend or neighbor in exchange for cash. Hence, one can, if necessary, fulfill this Misva by giving a check. One does not, however, fulfill this Misva by donating to the needy by charging his credit card. When one charges his credit card, the money is transferred only several days later, and so this does not qualify as a gift given on Purim itself. Theoretically, one can fulfill the Misva by charging his credit card several days before Purim, if he knows that the funds will be transferred on Purim day, though this is, of course, not very practical. Summary: One is required to give Matanot La'ebyonim (gifts to the poor) on Purim day. One can fulfill his requirement by giving money before Purim to somebody – like a Rabbi – who will distribute the money to the needy on Purim day. It is preferable to fulfill this Misva with cash, but if necessary, one fulfills the requirement also with a check. One cannot fulfill this obligation by charging a credit card.

Whereas Ashkenazic custom requires standing during Kaddish, the accepted practice among Sepharadim is to remain seated during Kaddish, unless one was standing when Kaddish began, in which case he must remain standing (until he completes his "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response). Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled that if a Sepharadi wishes to follow the stringent practice of the Ashkenazim and stand for Kaddish, he should not do so, as this appears arrogant. Since the accepted Sephardic custom is to remain seated, and even the greatest Rabbis sit during Kaddish, making a point of standing gives the appearance of thinking that one is better than everyone else, and this is therefore inappropriate. Hacham Ovadia notes the ruling of the Kol Eliyahu that one who decides to stand during the Torah reading – when the commonly accepted custom is to sit – should be reprimanded for this display of arrogance. By the same token, it is inappropriate to break the accepted Sephardic practice by standing for Kaddish. The Sedeh Hemed (Rav Haim Hizkiya Medini, Hebron, 1834-1904) writes that his practice was to stand for Kaddish. The reason may have been that as a Rabbinic leader, he felt this was an appropriate stringency to accept. Regardless, as a general rule, this is discouraged. Summary: Sephardic practice is to remain seated during Kaddish, and it is improper for a Sepharadi to make a point of standing.

Sephardic custom allows one to remain seated during Kaddish, but if one was standing at the time when Kaddish began, then he must remain standing. If an elderly person, or Torah scholar, passed by a person as he was sitting during Kaddish, and he rose in that individual's honor, then he must remain standing (until he completes his response of "Da'amiran Be'alma"). Although he was sitting when Kaddish began, nevertheless, once he stood, he is not then permitted to sit down, just as if he had been standing when Kaddish began. The exception to this rule is where the person did not fully stand up to honor the Torah scholar, but momentarily lifted his body off his seat. A person who is himself a Torah scholar is not required to stand fully when another Torah scholar passes by, and may merely gesture by lifting himself very briefly from his seat. If this happened during Kaddish, then the Torah scholar does not need to stand for the rest of Kaddish.

Sephardic practice allows one to remain seated during Kaddish, but if one had been standing when Kaddish begins, then he must remain standing. If somebody sees his fellow about to sit down during Kaddish, then he should remind him of the Halachic requirement to remain standing. Sometimes a person enters the synagogue in the middle of the prayer service, and, seeing that people are sitting, he goes to sit down in his seat, not realizing that the Hazzan is reciting Kaddish. One who sees his fellow about to make this mistake should remind him that he must stand. However, Hacham Ovadia Yosef writes that if one fears that this might embarrass his fellow, then he should not say anything. There is a minority view among the Poskim – that of the Pekudat Elazar – that one is required to remain standing during Kaddish only if the entire synagogue is standing. According to this view, if one enters the synagogue in the middle of the Kaddish, and the congregation is sitting, then he is allowed to sit. Although Halacha does not follow this opinion, it may be relied upon to avoid the risk of making one's fellow uncomfortable by pointing out his mistake. Therefore, if one has reason to fear that the person who is mistakenly sitting might feel slightly embarrassed, it is better to remain silent and not say anything. Summary: If a person who had been standing before Kaddish begins sitting down after Kaddish began, his fellow should point out to him that Halacha requires him to remain standing, unless this would make him uncomfortable, in which case it is preferable to remain silent.

Ashkenazic custom requires standing during Kaddish, whereas Sephardic practice allows sitting during Kaddish (unless one had been standing before Kaddish began). Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998) writes that if a Sepharadi is praying in an Ashkenazic Minyan, he must abide by the Ashkenazic custom and stand during Kaddish. If he remains seated, Hacham Bension writes, this would violate the prohibition of "Lo Titgodedu," which forbids following divergent religious practices in the same place. Hacham Bension makes an exception in a case where there are others in the Minyan sitting during Kaddish, such as elderly congregants who have difficulty standing and are thus permitted to sit during Kaddish even according to Ashkenazic practice. Since there are already some people sitting, a Sepharadi is permitted to sit, as well. Hacham Ovadia Yosef disagreed. He argued that the law of "Lo Titgodedu" does not apply when the divergent practices involve a Minhag (custom), as opposed to a strict Halachic obligation. It is thus not relevant to the issue of sitting or standing during Kaddish, and so a Sepharadi is allowed to sit during Kaddish in an Ashkenazic Minyan. Nevertheless, Hacham Ovadia added, if the Sepharadi has reason to suspect that sitting would cause tension and controversy – which we must always try to avoid – then he should certainly stand in the interest of maintaining peaceful relations among Jews. Summary: A Sepharadi praying in an Ashkenazic Minyan is allowed to sit during Kaddish, despite the fact that Ashkenazic custom requires standing. If, however, he suspects that sitting would cause tension and strife, then he should follow the local custom and stand.

Our practice follows the custom of the Arizal to remain sitting during Kaddish. Although Ashkenazim make a point of standing for Kaddish, Sephardic practice is to remain seated. The exception to this rule is the Kaddish recited before Barechu at the beginning of Arbit on Friday night, when many have the custom to stand. The Arizal taught that one should stand during this recitation of Barechu, as part of the extra Shabbat soul descends upon a person at this point. Therefore, since in any event one stands for Barechu, many have the custom to stand already during the Kaddish that precedes Barechu. As a general rule, however, Sephardic custom allows one to remain sitting for Kaddish. This applies only if a person was sitting before Kaddish began. If one was already standing when Kaddish starts, then he must remain standing. This was the practice of the Arizal. According to some Poskim, if one was standing when Kaddish began, then he must remain standing throughout the entire recitation of Kaddish. Others maintain that one must remain standing only until the Hazzan reaches "Da'amiran Be'alma Ve'imru Amen." Our custom follows a third opinion, that of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) – that one may sit after he completes his "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response, which, according to our community's practice, ends with the words "Da'amiran Be'alma." Once a person completes his response, he may sit, even though the Hazzan has not yet reached "Da'amiran Be'alma." Some have the misconception that it is improper to sit before the Hazzan reaches "Da'amiran Be'alma," but in truth, one may sit once he reaches that point. On Friday night, the congregation stands during the recitation of Vayechulu and the Hazzan's recitation of "Me'en Sheba," which is then followed by Kaddish. In some synagogues, people rush to sit down after the Hazzan concludes "Me'en Sheba" (with the recitation of "Baruch Ata Hashem Mekadesh Ha'Shabbat"), before he begins Kaddish, so they would not have to remain standing during Kaddish. Some Hazzanim even pause before Kaddish to give the congregants the opportunity to sit before Kaddish. Hacham Ovadia Yosef writes that this is improper, as specifically rushing to sit down before Kaddish begins shows disrespect to Kaddish. He brings as an example a ruling of the Ma'amar Mordechai (Rav Mordechai Karmi, 1749-1825) regarding the situation of somebody standing next to a person who is about to begin the Amida. Halacha requires one to stand if the individual next to him is reciting the Amida, unless he was sitting before his neighbor began the Amida, in which case he may remain seated. The Ma'amar Mordechai writes that one who is standing and sees that the person next to him will soon begin the Amida should not rush to sit down so he would not need to remain standing. By the same token, Hacham Ovadia writes, it is inappropriate to specifically rush to sit down before Kaddish in order to avoid having to stand during Kaddish. During Arbit, one may remain seated during the recitation of the Kaddish that precedes the Amida. Since one is already seated during Hashkibenu, he may remain seated for Kaddish, and then stand for the Amida prayer. On days when Tahanunim are not recited after the Hazzan's repetition of the Amida, and only the brief "Yehi Shem" recitation precedes Kaddish, it is proper to remain standing for Kaddish. Some people mistakenly think that they may sit down for Kaddish – even though they had been standing before Kaddish began – if the Hazzan sings the Kaddish and thus prolongs its recitation. This is incorrect; one must remain standing even if the Hazzan sings the Kaddish. However, the Poskim write that if the Hazzan knows that people are standing, he should ensure not to prolong the recitation of Kaddish, in order not to overburden the congregation by making them remain standing for several minutes. This Halacha alerts us to the care that must be taken to avoid "Tirha De'sibura" – causing the congregation even minor inconvenience. If Hazzanim are discouraged from prolonging the Kaddish recitation by several minutes when people are standing, then this shows us the sensitivity that Halacha requires toward the congregation. In fact, a well-known Hazzan told me that when he led the service on the High Holidays in Hacham Ovadia Yosef's synagogue, and he wanted to sing a special melody for Birkat Kohanim that was traditionally sung in Jerusalem communities, Hacham Ovadia instructed him not to. He explained that it would be inconsiderate to overburden the congregation who are standing during Birkat Kohanim – especially on Yom Kippur, when the people are fasting – by prolonging this part of the service. Unfortunately, it has become common to sing a great deal at Huppa ceremonies, which causes a great deal of inconvenience to the guests, and this practice should be discouraged. Summary: Sephardic custom is to remain seated during Kaddish. If one was standing before Kaddish began, then he must remain standing until he completes his "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response, through "Da'amiran Be'alma," at which point he may sit, even if the Hazzan has not yet reached "Da'amiran Be'alma." A Hazzan who knows that people are standing for Kaddish should not prolong the Kaddish recitation. It is improper to rush to sit down before Kaddish to avoid having to remain standing.

When a person recites Kaddish, he says at several points, "Ve'imru Amen" ("And say: Amen"), urging the congregation to respond "Amen" to what he has recited. The question thus arises as to what to do when all the men in the Minyan need to recite Kaddish. If they all recite Kaddish, then, seemingly, they cannot say, "Ve'imru Amen," because there is nobody present whom they can invite to respond "Amen." Some Poskim rule that in this situation, one or two men should volunteer not to say Kaddish, so there will be people responding to Kaddish. Others, however, contend that the men may all recite Kaddish without concern. These Poskim point to the fact that we end the silent Amida prayer with "Oseh Shalom Bi'mromav… Ve'imru Amen" – saying, "Ve'imru Amen" even though there is nobody listening. According to the Kabbalists, when we say, "Ve'imru Amen" at the end of the silent Amida, we are speaking to the angels. This can be applied also to Kaddish. Therefore, even if there is nobody responding, it is still acceptable to recite, "Ve'imru Amen." This is the position of Rav Eliyahu Mani (Hebron, 1818-1899), cited by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his work Rav Pe'alim. However, in Ben Ish Hai (Parashat Vayehi), after mentioning this position of Rav Eliyahu Mani, the Ben Ish Hai writes that it is preferable to have at least one person refrain from reciting Kaddish so he can respond. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) added that it is best to have two people refrain, as the phrase "Ve'imru Amen" is formulated in the plural form, inviting more than one person to respond. This is, indeed, the final Halacha – that although it is acceptable for everyone in the Minyan to recite Kaddish, it is preferred that at least two people refrain from reciting Kaddish so they can respond to the others.

One who recites Kaddish should do so loudly enough for the entire congregation to hear him. If, however, one is incapable of reciting Kaddish loudly, he may nevertheless recite Kaddish – as long as others in the congregation are reciting Kaddish loudly at the same time. This is the ruling of the Petah Ha'debir (Rav Haim Pontromoli, Turkey, d. 1873), and of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his Rav Pe'alim. The Ben Ish Hai adds that the practice in Bet El – a yeshiva of Kabbalists in Jerusalem – was that the Hazzan recited Kaddish aloud with the deep kabbalistic intentions, and those who did know these intentions recited Kaddish silently along with the Hazzan. This way, they could be considered to recite Kaddish with these deep intentions. Nevertheless, the Ben Ish Hai writes that as a general rule, congregants reciting Kaddish should do so in a loud voice. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939), by contrast, maintained that this practice is valid, though he added that the congregants who silently recite Kaddish should stand at a distance from the Hazzan, and that they should recite Kaddish loudly enough for two or three people near them to hear. By contrast, the Binyan Sion (Rav Yaakov Ettlinger, Germany, 1798-1871) ruled that one may not recite Kaddish silently. As for the final Halacha, one who cannot recite Kaddish loudly may recite it quietly, though he should try to ensure that at least two or three people near him can hear his recitation. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998) ruled similarly regarding the case where many people recite Kaddish, and because they do not recite it in unison, the recitation is chaotic and none of them can be heard. While this situation is, of course, undesirable, and the people reciting Kaddish should strive to do so in unison, nevertheless, if the recitation is chaotic, one is nevertheless permitted to recite Kaddish with the others, even though he will not be heard. Summary: One who recites Kaddish must do so in a loud voice, so that he can be heard by everyone in the synagogue. If one cannot recite Kaddish loudly, he may recite it quietly, though he should try to ensure that at least two or three people near him can hear his recitation.

When two or more people recite Kaddish together, they must make an effort to recite the words in unison, at the same pace. Otherwise, this causes a great deal of confusion for the congregants, who need to respond at various points during the Kaddish. If the people reciting Kaddish do not say the words in unison, and one reaches "Ve'imru Amen" (or "Berich Hu") before the other, to whom should the congregation respond? The Halachot Ketanot (Rav Yisrael Yaakob Hagiz, 1620-1674) writes that if the people reciting Kaddish reach "Ve'imru Amen" within one second of another, then the congregation may respond to whichever one they choose. This is based on the principle of "Toch Ke'deh Dibur," which allows us to ignore a period short enough to say the words "Shalom Alechem Rebbe," which is approximately one second. If two people say "Ve'imru Amen" within one second of one another, then they may be considered as having recited this together, simultaneously, and so one may respond to either. However, the Halachot Ketanot writes, if the two people say "Ve'imru Amen" more than a second apart, then the congregation answers "Amen" to them both. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) rules accordingly, except that in his view, if the two people recite "Ve'imru Amen" more than a second apart, then the congregation should answer "Amen" to the one who recites it first. This applies only if the two people are reciting Kaddish together in the same Minyan. If, however, a person hears Kaddish from a different Minyan while Kaddish is being recited in his Minyan, then he responds only to the Kaddish recited in his Minyan. This situation arises very often at the Kotel, where different Minyanim pray in a relatively small area, and one is thus likely to hear other Minyanim while he prays with his Minyan. If he hears Kaddish recited in a different Minyan at the same time as Kaddish is being recited in his Minyan, he responds only to the Kaddish in his Minyan. If a person hears somebody else complete a Beracha just when he must respond to Kaddish, then he should respond to both the Kaddish and the Beracha, even if the Beracha ends within one second of the recitation of "Ve'imru Amen" in Kaddish. Since these are two separate recitations, one must answer "Amen" to both. If he must respond at the same time, he should say, "Amen Ve'amen," instead of "Amen Amen." This is the ruling of the Hesed La'alafim (Rav Eliezer Papo, 1785-1828). It sometimes happens that somebody arrives late for Shaharit, and he puts on his Tallit or Tefillin during the Kaddish Al Yisrael recited after "Rabbi Yishmael Omer…" The people near him might then need to respond to his Beracha over the Tallit and Tefillin at the same time they respond to Kaddish. In such a case, they should respond, "Amen Ve'amen." Summary: When two or more people recite Kaddish together, they must make an effort to recite it in unison. If it happens that one person recites Kaddish slower than the other, then the congregation must respond to both of them separately, unless the two people reach "Ve'imru Amen" within one second of each other, in which case the congregation responds to the person who said "Ve'imru Amen" first. If one hears Kaddish from a different Minyan at the same time as Kaddish is recited in his Minyan, he responds only to the Kaddish in his Minyan. If a person hears someone complete a Beracha just as he must respond to Kaddish, then he answers "Amen" to each one separately, even if they end within one second of one another, in which case he responds, "Amen Ve'amen."

When a person answers "Amen Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish, he is expressing his agreement to the prayer recited by the Hazzan, that G-d's Name should be glorified throughout the world. The question thus arises as to whether a person can respond "Amen Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" if he entered the synagogue after the congregation began responding. Must he have heard the beginning of Kaddish from the Hazzan in order to respond, or does it suffice that the congregation is responding at that time for him to join? Hacham Ovadia Yosef, based on the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) in Parashat Vayehi, writes that the person in this case may, in fact, join the congregation. As long as the congregation is still in the middle of the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response, the person may respond together with them. The Poskim debate the question of whether the person in this case should begin his response with "Amen," or if he should omit "Amen" and begin with "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." The Ben Ish Hai brings those who maintain that since the person did not hear the Hazzan's recitation of the beginning of Kaddish, he cannot answer "Amen," as this would constitute an "Amen Yetoma" (literally, "an orphan Amen") – an "Amen" that does not respond to anything, which is improper. Hacham Ovadia Yosef cited opinions that permit the person to begin with "Amen" if he can quickly think of the words of Kaddish to which he will be responding. However, Hacham Ovadia then brought the ruling of the Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806) that if a person hears others answering "Amen" to a Beracha which he did not hear, he may not answer "Amen" with them even if he knows precisely which Beracha they are responding to. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, 1870-1939) agreed with this ruling. According to this opinion, one should not answer "Amen" to Kaddish if he did not hear the Hazzan, even if he can quickly think of the Hazzan's words in his mind. Hacham Ovadia thus concluded that it is preferable not to begin with "Amen" in this case, though he added that one who wishes to begin with "Amen" has a basis on which to rely. Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, noted that different views exist among the Poskim as to whether the rule of "Amen Yetoma" applies to one who responds to Kaddish. In light of this question, Hacham David ruled that one may, in fact, respond "Amen" to Kaddish even if he did not hear the Hazzan, as long as he can think the words in his mind. We generally follow the rulings of Hacham Ovadia, and so it is preferable in this case for the person to begin his response with "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," omitting "Amen." This entire discussion applies only if the Hazzan had not yet begun "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." If a person arrives after the Hazzan had begun "Yeheh Shemeh," then according to all opinions, he should not begin with "Amen." This situation is comparable to one who did not answer "Amen" to a blessing of the Amida during the Hazzan's repetition, until the Hazzan began the next Beracha. Once the Hazzan begins the next Beracha, one can no longer answer "Amen." By the same token, one cannot answer "Amen" to Kaddish once the Hazzan had proceeded with "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." The Poskim debate the question of whether one answers "Amen" if he arrived in the synagogue during Kaddish just as the Hazzan recited, "Ve'imru Amen" ("And say: 'Amen'"). The Ben Ish Hai implies that the person cannot answer "Amen," even though he heard the Hazzan announce "Ve'imru Amen," since he did not hear the words to which the congregation now responds. By contrast, both the Kaf Ha'haim and Hacham David Yosef maintain that the person can answer "Amen" in such a case. The Hazzan must ensure not to repeat the word "Amen" before he begins "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." After declaring, "Ve'imru Amen," and then pausing to allow the congregation to begin their response, he should proceed directly to "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," and must not make the mistake of repeating the word "Amen." Summary: If a person arrived in the synagogue as the congregation was responding "Amen Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish, he may join in their response, unless the Hazzan had begun reciting "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," in which case it is too late to respond. If the Hazzan had yet to begin "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," the person joins the congregation's response but should preferably omit "Amen" and begin from "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." If a person arrived just when the Hazzan recited "Ve'imru Amen," he may respond "Amen" with the congregation.

Kaddish is a prayer asking that Hashem's Name shall be recognized, revered and glorified throughout the world. When we answer to the Hazzan, "Amen, Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," we are essentially joining in this prayer, affirming that we, too, pray and yearn for the time when G-d's Name will be great. The Rabbis teach that during our period of exile, G-d's Name is "incomplete," as it were, consisting only of the first two letters – Yod and Heh. This is indicated in Hashem's pronouncement following the war against Amalek, "Ki Yad Al Kes Y-ah" (Shemot 17:16) – that as long as Amalek has yet to be defeated, and evil still exists in the world, G-d's Name is "Y-ah," consisting of only two letters. In the future, the Vav and the second Heh will be added to complete the Name. The Hazzan thus begins Kaddish with the words "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash," which together consist of eleven letters – an allusion to the letters Vav and Heh, which have the combined number value of 11. "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash Shemeh Rabba" is a prayer that G-d's Name shall be "completed" through its glorification among all peoples on earth. We therefore proclaim in our response to Kaddish, "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" – that Hashem's Name shall be "Rabba," "large" and complete, with the arrival of Mashiah, when G-d's Name will be acknowledged and respected throughout the world. Because we respond to Kaddish so often – numerous times each day – we are prone to answering mindlessly, without paying attention to what we are saying. We should try, as much as possible, to concentrate on the meaning of the Hazzan's declaration, and on the meaning of our response – that we are praying for G-d's Name to be known and glorified throughout the world. Some have the custom when the Hazzan begins Kaddish to recite the verse, "Ve'ata Yigdal Na Koah Hashem…" (Bamidbar 14:17). However, the Arizal taught that this practice is incorrect. One should listen silently and attentively to the Hazzan's recitation, and then have in mind when responding that we are joining in his prayer for the glorification of the divine Name.

During Kaddish, the Hazzan must recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" along with the congregation. The Mishna Berura writes that the Hazzan recites "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" silently, and then raises his voice again when he reaches the word "Yitbarach." The work Az Nidberu (Rav Binyamin Zilber, 1916-2008) explains the Mishna Berura to mean that the Hazzan may recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" silently if he so wishes, but he must then raise his voice beginning with the word "Yitbarach." This ruling, the Az Nidberu explains, is based on the Lebush (Rav Mordechai Yoffe, 1530-1612), who writes that when the congregation responds to Barechu by declaring, "Baruch Hashem Ha'meborach Le'olam Va'ed," the Hazzan also makes this declaration, and may do so silently if he so wishes. By the same token, the Hazzan may recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" silently. It is unclear, however, why, according to this view, the Gemara's promise of reward for one who responds to "Yeheh Shemeh" with "all his strength" ("Be'chol Koho") does not apply to the Hazzan. We would assume that just as the members of the congregation are encouraged to respond "with all their strength," this should be true of the Hazzan, as well. The answer, as some have suggested, might be that the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response is primarily for the congregation, and not for the Hazzan. The Hazzan joins only so that he does not exclude himself from the congregation. Therefore, it is not necessary for him to recite it loudly. However, there seems to be a different reason to require the Hazzan to recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" aloud. The Shulhan Aruch (104:7) writes that if somebody hears Nakdishach or Kaddish while he recites the Amida, he should pause and listen attentively to the Hazzan, whereby he can be considered to have responded to Nakdishach and Kaddish. This ruling clearly assumes that the Hazzan recites the entire Kaddish – including "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" – loudly, such that the congregants who are still reciting the Amida can listen and thereby fulfill the Misva of responding. It is possible that the Mishna Berura referred to a case where nobody in the congregation was still reciting the Amida, and for this reason, he wrote that the Hazzan does not need to recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" out loud. Regardless, the accepted practice is that the Hazzan recites "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" aloud, just like the rest of the Kaddish. In light of what we have seen, the Hazzan must have in mind when reciting Kaddish (and Nakdishach, for that matter) that his recitation should fulfill the obligation for those who are reciting the Amida and thus cannot respond. Those who wish to fulfill the Misva by listening to the Hazzan can do so only if both they and the Hazzan have this in mind, and it is therefore imperative that the Hazzan has in mind to fulfill the obligation for those who cannot respond. In fact, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) writes that if a person reciting the Amida knows that the Hazzan is unaware of this Halacha, and does not have in mind for his Kaddish recitation to fulfill the obligation for those reciting the Amida, then there is no reason for this person to interrupt his Amida prayer to hear the Kaddish. Since the Hazzan does not have in mind for his recitation to fulfill the listeners' obligation, the listeners have no possibility of fulfilling their obligation, and they might as well just continue their Amida without pausing to hear the Hazzan's recitation of Kaddish. Hacham Ovadia Yosef concurred with this ruling. Summary: During Kaddish, the Hazzan recites "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" together with the congregation. He should do so in a loud voice – like the rest of Kaddish – and should have in mind that those who are reciting the Amida, and thus cannot respond, will fulfill their obligation by listening to his recitation.

Our custom is to extend the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response during Kaddish all the way to "Da'amiran Be'alma." It sometimes happens that the Hazzan does not recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" slow enough to allow the congregation to complete their response before he recites "De'Kudsha Berich Hu." The congregation is meant to answer "Amen" to "De'Kudsha Berich Hu," and the question thus arises as to whether they may answer if they are still in the middle of their "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response, having yet to reach "Da'amiran Be'alma." The Arizal, in Sha'ar Ha'kavanot, implies that one should not respond to "De'Kudsha Berich Hu" if he is still in the middle of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." This is the ruling of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Rav Pe'alim. One could explain that the "Amen" response to "De'Kudsha Berich Hu" is less significant than the other "Amen" responses to Kaddish, as evidenced by the fact that not all customs require answering "Amen" at that point. This response therefore does not justify interrupting "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." In truth, however, the Ben Ish Hai applied this ruling even if the Hazzan recites "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" so fast that he reaches "Da'amiran Be'alma" before the congregation. In the Ben Ish Hai's view, even the "Amen" response to "Da'amiran Be'alma" does not justify interrupting "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." This was the position also of Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998). Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, disagreed. He maintained that although one should not interrupt "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to respond to "De'kudsha Berich Hu," one should interrupt to respond to "Da'amiran Be'alma." Optimally, of course, the Hazzan should recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" slowly, in order to allow the congregation to complete their response before the Hazzan reaches "De'Kudsha Berich Hu." The Ben Ish Hai laments the fact that he was hardly ever able to answer "Amen" to "De'Kudsha Berich Hu," because the Hazzanim in Baghdad recited "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" too quickly. He repeatedly asked them to recite it more slowly, but they did not. The Hazzan should preferably pause before beginning "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," and then recite it slowly, so that the congregation can finish their response in time to answer to "De"Kudsha Berich Hu." Summary: Hazzanim should recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" in Kaddish slowly, to ensure that the congregation completes their response in time to answer "Amen" to "De"Kudsha Berich Hu." If one has yet to complete his "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response before the Hazzan reaches "De"Kudsha Berich Hu," he should not interrupt his response to answer "Amen." Regarding one who does not finish his "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response before the Hazzan reaches "Da'amiran Be'alma," different views exist among the Poskim as to whether he should interrupt his response to answer "Amen" at that point.

The Bet Yosef cites the famous kabbalist Rav Yosef Gikatilla (Spain, 13th century) as establishing that in the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response to Kaddish, one must not make any interruption between the word "Almaya" and the next word, "Yitbarach." Although it appears that the word "Yitbarach" begins the next sentence, Rav Gikatilla taught that the word "Yitbarach" immediately follows "U'l'olmeh Almaya." Accordingly, the Shulhan Aruch ruled that when responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," one must not stop at the word "Almaya," and should instead continue to "Yitbarach." On this basis, the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in Od Yosef Hai, ruled that one must ensure not to pause at all between the words "Almaya" and "Yitbarach," even momentarily. However, the Siddur of the Rashash (Rav Shalom Sharabi, Yemen, 1720-1777) instructs that one should specifically make a pause between these words. The Od Yosef Hai writes that common custom does not follow this view, and instead follows the teaching of Rav Yosef Gikatilla. It appears from the Ben Ish Hai that if one asks for guidance, he should be told to make a pause, but those who have the custom not to pause should continue observing this practice. Elsewhere, the Ben Ish Hai writes that no pause should be made between these words, and this is also the implication of the Shulhan Aruch's ruling. Moreover, this is the universal practice among Sephardim, which should be observed. Summary: The prevalent custom among Sephardic communities when responding to Kaddish is to recite "Le'alam U'l'olmeh Almaya Yitbarach..." without any pause between "Almaya" and "Yitbarach."

Different views exist regarding the congregation's "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response during Kaddish. All agree that this response is associated with the number 28, but there is a disagreement as to how this association is to be expressed. The significance of this number in the context of the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response is indicated by the Gemara, which speaks of the great rewards for reciting this response "Bechol Koho" – with all one's strength. The word "Koah" ("strength") in Gematria equals 28, and so we associate this response with the number 28. The Abudarham (Spain, 14 th century) maintained that the congregation should respond with 28 letters – "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" through "Almaya." This response consists of seven words and 28 letters. Rav Yishak Abuhab (Spain, 14 th century), cited by the Bet Yosef, ruled that one should recite 28 words – from "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" through "Da'amiran Be'alma." The Bet Yosef writes that the first view is incorrect, as one may not end the response after the word "Almaya." He brings a Midrash warning of grave punishment for those who make a separation between this word and the next word, "Yitbarach." This point is emphasized also by the great Kabbalist Rav Yosef Gikatilla (Spain, 13th century), who writes of the importance of not separating between these two words. Accordingly, the Shulhan Aruch writes that those who end their response with the word "Almaya" act incorrectly. The Magen Abraham (Rav Abraham Gombiner, Poland, 1635-1682) understood the Shulhan Aruch to mean that one should continue his response through the word "Be'alma," though the Magen Abraham himself maintained that one should respond only through "Almaya." Regardless, we generally follow the customs of the Arizal, who taught that one should respond through "Da'amiran Be'alma." There are some who respond through "De'Kudsha Berich Hu," but this practice has no halachic basis and is incorrect. Those who are accustomed to doing so should discontinue this practice. Among the Ashkenazim, many have the custom to respond only through "Almaya." This was the view of the Gaon of Vilna (1720-1797). He disputed the view that "Yitbarach" must be recited immediately after the word "Almaya," arguing that "Yitbarach" begins the next sentence. Nevertheless, some Ashkenazim add "Yitbarach" and conclude their response at that point. The Aruch Ha'shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein, 1829-1908) observed that this was the prevalent practice among Lithuanian communities, despite the view of the Vilna Gaon. It is worth adding further insight into the connection between Kaddish and the number 28 – which, as mentioned, is the Gematria of the word "Koah." Rashi, in his opening comments to the Humash, writes that the Torah begins with the story of the world's creation in order to establish that the entire world belongs to G-d, as it is He who created it, and He thus had the authority to give Eretz Yisrael to the Jewish People. If the gentiles challenge our rights to our homeland – which they of course do, especially in our day and age – we must know that Hashem created the world and distributed it as He saw fit, and He decided to give us the Land of Israel. Rashi cites the verse in Tehillim (111:6), "Koah Ma'asav Higid Le'amo, La'tet Lahem Nahalat Goyim" – "He told His nation the power of His deeds, in order to give them the nations' territory." The story of G-d's "power," the creation of the world, is our response when nations challenge our right to the territory that we seized from the people of Canaan. Not coincidentally, the opening verse of the Torah ("Bereshit Bara Elokim…") consists of seven words and 28 letters – just like "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba…" – and Rashi links this verse to the verse "Koah Ma'asav Higid Le'amo," which begins with the word "Koah." Through our response to Kaddish, then, we access Hashem's unlimited power, expressed most strikingly through the act of creation, and this gives us the ability to withstand any challenge from our adversaries. It is worth noting in this context the famous Midrashic tradition that Moshe Rabbenu recited 515 prayers asking for the privilege of entering Eretz Yisrael (the numerical value of the word "Va'et'hanan"), and if he would have recited a 516 th prayer, Hashem would have had to grant his request. The commentaries explain that this 516 th prayer that Moshe would have recited was Kaddish, which begins with the words "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash Shemeh Rabba." The first letters of these words (Yod, Vav, Shin, Resh) have a combined numerical value of 516 (10+6+300+200). This sheds additional light on the connection between Kaddish and Eretz Yisrael. When we recite and respond to Kaddish, we are asking that Hashem's Name should be glorified through our nation living in the land with the Bet Ha'mikdash under the reign of Mashiah, and this prayer has special power and significance. In light of this association between "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" and the number 28, it is critically important to enunciate each word. If one responds too quickly, he might likely fail to pronounce the word "Min" in the phrase ("Le'ela Min Kol Birchata"), and will thus recite fewer than 28 words. The Poskim write that one should respond "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" slowly and carefully, ensuring to properly pronounce each word. Summary: Our custom is to respond during Kaddish from "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" through "Da'amiran Be'alma" – a total of 28 words. This number is very significant, and therefore one must ensure to respond slowly and properly pronounce all the words.

One of the points during Kaddish when the congregation answers "Amen" is after "Shemeh De'Kudsha Berich Hu." Ashkenazic custom, however, is not to recite "Amen" at that point, and to recite "Berich Hu" instead of "Amen." Rav Moshe Feinstein (1895-1986) rules that according to the Ashkenazic custom, a person who hears Kaddish while reciting Pesukeh De'zimra should not respond "Berich Hu." Although he may answer "Amen" to Kaddish, he may not answer "Berich Hu," as this does not qualify as an obligatory response that warrants interrupting Pesukeh De'zimra. This position was taken also by Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995). Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky (1891-1986) and Rav Chaim Kanievsky (1928-2022) went even further, ruling that Ashkenazim should preferably not answer "Berich Hu" to the Hasi-Kaddish recited before the Amida prayer during Arbit. Interruptions are not permitted during Arbit from Barechu through the Amida prayer, though "Amen" responses are allowed. According to the aforementioned Poskim, the response of "Berich Hu" is not significant enough to warrant an interruption before the Amida, and so the congregation should not respond "Berich Hu." Rav Moshe Feinstein, however, maintained that the "Berich Hu" response is allowed at that point.

Our practice is to answer "Amen" five times to the Hasi Kaddish: after "Shemeh Rabba," after "Ve'yasmah Purkaneh Vi'ykareb Meshiheh," after "U'bi'zman Karib Ve'imru Amen," after "De'Kudsha Berich Hu," and after "Da'amiran Be'alma Ve'imru Amen." These responses follow the teaching of the Arizal, and of Maran (author of the Shulhan Aruch) in Maggid Mesharim – the record of the lessons he was taught by the angel who came to learn Torah with him. When we answer "Amen," we are expressing our wish that the words in the Kaddish should be fulfilled, namely, that Hashem's Name should be glorified throughout the world. Interestingly, the Shulhan Aruch makes no mention of the first two "Amen" responses, after "Shemeh Rabba" and "Vi'ykareb Meshiheh." The Rambam mentions the first, but not the second. Both the Rambam and the Shulhan Aruch state that "Amen" should be recited after the word "Yitbarach." Regardless, the widespread practice follows the Arizal's teaching, to say "Amen" at the five points listed earlier. The custom among many Ashkenazic communities is to omit entirely from Kaddish the phrase "Ve'yasmah Purkaneh Vi'ykareb Meshiheh." Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998) writes that if a Sepharadi is reciting Kaddish in an Ashkenazic congregation, he should recite the Sephardic version of Kaddish, unless this might create discord and make people upset. If he is concerned that the people might be displeased by his recitation of the Sephardic text of Kaddish, then in the interest of maintaining peace he should recite the Ashkenazic version of Kaddish. If he recites Kaddish together with Ashkenazic members of the congregation, then he should recite the Ashkenazic version of Kaddish, as he would otherwise cause confusion, given that the congregation is not accustomed to hearing "Ve'yasmah Purkaneh Vi'ykareb Meshiheh." If, however, it can be assumed that the congregation is familiar with the Sephardic text of Kaddish, then the Sepharadi should recite the Sephardic text. This is, indeed, the prevalent practice today in Israel, where most communities are familiar with both versions of Kaddish.

Often, on Shabbat and Yamim Tobim, the Hazzan sings the Kaddish in a melodious tune, and in some synagogues, the congregation joins the Hazzan's singing. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) writes that this is improper. The Kaddish is only for the Hazzan to recite; the congregation must listen silently and respond, without joining in the Hazzan's recitation.

The final Kaddish recited in the prayer service (either Kaddish Al Yisrael, or Kaddish Yeheh Shelama) is customarily recited by mourners. If there are no mourners, then the Kaddish is usually recited by somebody whose mother or father had passed away, Heaven forbid. It sometimes happens, however, that there is nobody in attendance to say Kaddish – no mourners, and nobody who had lost a parent. What should be done in this situation? I recall hearing Rabbi Max Maslaton teach that Kaddish is part of the prayer service, and it must therefore not be skipped, just like no other part of the prayer service may be skipped. Beyond the benefit the Kaddish recitation brings to the soul of a departed parent, it also is intrinsically significant as an important part of the Tefila. Therefore, Rabbi Maslaton said that somebody who is not prepared to recite the final Kaddish should not serve as Hazzan, because if there is nobody in the congregation to recite the final Kaddish, then the Hazzan should recite it. In practice, however, there are many people who feel uneasy about reciting Kaddish if both their parents are alive. I recall as a student in Magen David, where I would often serve as Hazzan, Hacham Baruch Ben-Haim told me to ask my father if he allowed me to recite the final Kaddish. I did, and my father did not permit it. This feeling is quite common, and one whose parents do not feel comfortable with him reciting this Kaddish should not do so. Inherently, however, there is no concern whatsoever about this Kaddish recitation bringing "bad luck" or posing any sort of danger to the parents. Therefore, unless the Hazzan's parents have strong feelings about the matter, he should recite the final Kaddish if nobody in the congregation does.

The Shulhan Aruch writes that one should "run" to hear and respond to Kaddish. If one has the opportunity to hear the recitation of Kaddish, he should enthusiastically seize the opportunity. Sometimes, people are in a rush to leave the synagogue early, and they forfeit opportunities to hear Kaddish. Responding to Kaddish is a precious Misva, and so one should eagerly seize opportunities to do so. If a person is in a place where two different Minyanim are occurring simultaneously – such as at the Kotel in Jerusalem – and he hears one Minyan reciting Kaddish, and another Minyan reciting Nakdishach, then he should respond "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" at the expense of responding to Nakdishach. However, this applies only if the person does not need to fulfill his Nakdishach obligation at that time – meaning, he already recited that prayer, or he will be reciting that prayer in a Minyan later. But if a person is praying with a Minyan, and as the Hazzan reaches Nakdishach he hears Kaddish from a different Minyan, then he should respond to Nakdishach in the Minyan in which he is participating at that time. In this instance, his current prayer service takes precedence over the Kaddish being recited in a different Minyan. If a person began responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish, and at that moment he hears Nakdishach, then he should end his response after "Almaya Yitbarach" so he can respond to Nakdishach Normally, our custom is to extend our response of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" through "Be'alma." In this case, however, in the interest of being able to respond to Nakdishach, one should end his response with "Almaya Yitbarach." If one hears Kaddish while listening to Nakdishach, he should respond to Nakdishach as usual without interrupting to respond to Kaddish. If a person finds himself near two Minyanim, one of which is about to recite Kaddish Titkabal (the Kaddish recited after the Amida) and the other is about to recite Nakdishach, then he should join the Minyan that is about to recite Nakdishach. The reason is, quite simply, that the Minyan which is now starting Nakdishach will recite Kaddish Titkabal after the repetition of the Amida. Therefore, by going to that Minyan, one has the opportunity to hear both Nakdishach and Kaddish Titkabal. This is the ruling of the Mishna Berura. The Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) adds that this applies even if one must pass by the Minyan reciting Kaddish to get to the Minyan reciting Nakdishach. Whereas normally it is improper to pass by a Misva opportunity, in this instance it is preferable to go to the further Minyan for the reason discussed.

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (119) speaks of the great merit earned by responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish, stating that responding "with all one's strength" has the ability to annul harsh decrees issued against a person. The conventional understanding of this teaching is that it refers to responding with Kavana (concentration), with full attention and emotion. However, Tosafot cite an explanation that the Gemara speaks here of responding in a loud voice. Accordingly, the Shulhan Aruch writes that one should respond to Kaddish both with Kavana, and in a loud voice. Although it is proper to respond to Kaddish out loud, one must ensure not to turn his response into a spectacle. The purpose of Kaddish is to bring glory to Hashem – not to bring glory to oneself. Therefore, if one responds to Kaddish in a manner that brings attention to himself, this undermines the entire purpose of this prayer. Generally speaking, it is improper when responding to the Hazzan's prayer to do so more loudly than the Hazzan. The verse in Tehillim (34:4) states, "Gadelu L'Hashem Iti" – "Give praise to G-d with me," implying that the leader and the congregation should pray together, at the same volume, without trying to drown out each other. Accordingly, when responding to Kaddish, one should ensure not to respond in a louder voice than the Hazzan (or of whoever it is who recites Kaddish). Interestingly, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Jerusalem, 1910-1995) maintained that this Halacha does not apply to the response of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." He contended that "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" is not a response to the Hazzan, but rather an independent declaration. Therefore, one may recite "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" even more loudly than the Hazzan. The accepted Halacha, however, does not follow this view, and instead treats "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" as a response, which must therefore not be declared in a louder voice than the Hazzan's. Accordingly, the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) writes that the Hazzan or person reciting Kaddish should ensure to say Kaddish loudly, so that the congregation can answer out loud without answering more loudly than him. Summary: One should respond to Kaddish with concentration and in a loud voice, though one should not respond more loudly than the Hazzan (or other person reciting Kaddish). Therefore, one who recites Kaddish should do so loudly, so that the congregation can respond loudly but not more loudly than his recitation.

The Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (119) teaches that responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" to Kaddish "with all one's strength" has the power to annul harsh decrees. According to some versions of this passage, even if a decree of seventy years of suffering was issued against a person, he can have the decree repealed by answering "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" with all his "strength." The common understanding of this expression – "with all one's strength" – is that it refers to full Kavana (concentration). Answering to Kaddish with concentration, focusing on the meaning of the words, has the power to annul harsh decrees. People often look for effective "Segulot," especially when they are dealing with some kind of problem or crisis, or when they have an important court case or business deal. Unfortunately, they generally overlook what might be the most obvious and most well-documented "Segula" of all – responding to Kaddish with full concentration. No matter what harsh punishment has been decreed against a person, he has the opportunity to have it annulled by responding to Kaddish properly. People who talk during Kaddish need to remember that they can gain far more by concentrating during Kaddish than they do with any conversation they have with their fellow. The "return on investment" for properly concentrating during Kaddish is far greater than we could ever imagine. The Yeser Ha'ra (evil inclination), knowing the great benefits of concentrating on Kaddish, lures a person to disregard Kaddish, and to engage in conversation instead of listening and responding properly. But speaking during Kaddish – even words of Torah! – is strictly forbidden by Halacha, and by doing so, one forfeits the immense rewards that this special prayer offers, and becomes liable to punishment, Heaven forbid. The Bet Yosef brings the story of Rabbi Hama who saw Eliyahu Ha'nabi leading thousands of camels loaded with "anger and wrath," and Eliyahu said that all this anger is for those who engage in conversation during the recitation of Kaddish. And the Kaf Ha'haim (Rav Yaakob Haim Sofer, Baghdad-Jerusalem, 1870-1939) cites the Mateh Moshe as relating that a certain Torah scholar had a student who died young, and the student appeared to him in a dream, with an unseemly mark on his forehead. The student explained that this mark was his punishment for speaking during Kaddish. One should not fold his Tallit or Tefillin, or engage in other activity, during the recitation of Kaddish, so that he can fully concentrate on the words. This applies to all the Kaddish recitations – the Kaddishim recited during the prayer service, the Kaddish recited after Torah learning, the Kaddish recited at an Arayat, and so on. Rav Yisrael Bitan cites an opinion that this applies only when one responds, "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," though Rav Bitan disagrees, and maintains that this is forbidden even while listening to Kaddish. He adds, however, that this is forbidden only through "Da'amiran Be'alma," which is the essential Kaddish. During the remainder of Kaddish, which is a later addition to Kaddish, it is permissible to engage in other activities. If someone fell behind during the prayers, and needs to complete the previous prayer during Kaddish, he should do so only after "Da'amiran Be'alma." Until that point, he should remain silent and respond to the Kaddish. Rav Bitan cites this ruling from the Mishna Berura.

Just as it is improper to intentionally create a situation that requires an additional Beracha, it is similarly improper to intentionally create a situation requiring an additional recitation of Kaddish. For example, on the night of Hoshana Rabba, when it is customary to recite Tehillim, the group should not make unnecessary interruptions so that extra Kaddishim could be recited. Kaddish Yeheh Shelama is recited after the reading of Torah She'bi'chtab (Tanach), but it is improper to unnecessarily interrupt for the purpose of adding extra Kaddishim. Likewise, Kaddish is recited only at the designated points in the prayer service, and after a session learning, but not after other prayers or ceremonies. This is discussed already by the Rambam, in one of his published responsa. Kaddish is customarily recited after a Berit Mila only because we recite a chapter of Tehillim as part of the ceremony. Otherwise, Kaddish should not be recited. Kaddish is not recited after a Huppa, after a Pidyon Ha'ben, or after other ceremonies. If a Torah class was taught immediately before Arbit, and the class was followed by Kaddish Al Yisrael, then the Hazzan should begin Arbit with "Ve'hu Rahum," rather than with Hasi Kaddish, since Kaddish Al Yisrael was just recited. This is the ruling of Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura, and this was the practice followed each day by his father, Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Rav Yisrael Bitan notes that seemingly, it should be acceptable to recite the Hasi Kaddish before Arbit in this case, since both Kaddish recitations are legitimately necessitated – the first because of the Torah class, and the second as the introduction to Arbit. Evidently, Rav Bitan writes, Hacham Ovadia felt that since the congregation begins Arbit immediately after Kaddish Al Yisrael, this Kaddish serves both purposes – concluding the Torah class, and introducing Arbit. Rav Bitan adds that this was the opinion also of Rav Mordechai Sharabi (Yemen-Jerusalem, 1908-1983) and Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998). It must be emphasized, however, that if an interruption was made following the Kaddish Al Yisrael before Arbit, then the Hasi Kaddish should be recited before Arbit as usual. The Kaddish is omitted only if the congregation begins Arbit immediately after the recitation of Kaddish Al Yisrael. A similar situation arises on Friday night, in synagogues where the Rabbi speaks just before Arbit. Rav Meir Mazuz (1945-2025) writes that in such a case, Kaddish Al Yisrael should not be recited after the Rabbi's address, and the Hazzan should proceed to Hasi-Kaddish and Barechu. If the congregation insists on reciting Kaddish Al Yisrael after the Rabbi's talk. Rav Mazuz adds, then the service should be rearranged such that a different portion of the service requiring Kaddish – such as Lechu Neranena and Shir Hashirim – is recited after the Kaddish Al Yisrael, so the Hazzan can then recite Hasi-Kaddish before Barechu.

Numerous sources emphasize the great importance and value of answering to Kaddish. In Masechet Berachot (6b), the Gemara teaches that when Hashem comes into the synagogue and sees that there are fewer than ten men present, "Miyad Hu Ko'es" – He immediately becomes angry. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) raised the question of why the Gemara adds the word "Miyad" – "immediately." What is added by telling us that G-d's anger is aroused instantly? The Ben Ish Hai answers by suggesting that "Miyad Hu Ko'es" means that Hashem grows angry because of "Yad" – the letters Yod and Dalet. The letter Yod equals 10, alluding to the minimum of ten Kaddishim which one should hear and respond to each day, and Dalet equals 4 – referring to the four recitations of Nakdishach which a person should hear and respond to each day. When people do not come to the Minyan, Hashem becomes angry – even though the people can pray privately, because they cannot respond to Kaddish or Nakdishach. The Gemara in Masechet Sota (49a) states that although the world's condition has been worsening progressively since the Bet Ha'mikdash was destroyed, it is sustained in the merit of the "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" response to Kaddish, and of the recitation of the Kidusha De'sidra (a section of the U'ba Le'sion prayer). Moreover, the Gemara in Masechet Shabbat (119b, according to one version of the text) teaches that if a person was deemed worthy of seventy years of suffering, he can have the decree rescinded in the merit of responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" with all his strength. The Gemara further states that the merit of this response can bring a person atonement even for the sin of idolatry. Another passage there in the Gemara teaches that if a person responds "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" with all his strength, the gates of Gan Eden are opened for him. Similarly, the Sefer Hasidim (Rabbenu Yehuda Ha'hasid, Germany, 1150-1217) writes that one who regularly responds "Amen" in this world earns the privilege of doing so also in the world to come. This is alluded to in the verse in Tehillim (89:53), "Baruch Hashem Le'olam Amen Ve'amen" ("Blessed is G-d forever, Amen and Amen"). The phrase "Amen Ve'amen" alludes to the response of "Amen" both in this world and the next. Another important source is the Gemara's teaching in Masechet Berachot (3a) that when Jews gather in the synagogue and declare, "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba," Hashem exclaims, "Fortunate is the king whose subjects praise him this way!" The Bet Yosef cites the Zohar as explaining that Kaddish is recited in Aramaic, instead of Hebrew, because it has the unique power to oppose the Kelipot ("shells," the harmful spiritual forces). We use the inferior language, Aramaic, so we can attack the Kelipot in their language, as it were, and this has the effect of eliminating the forces of evil from the world. Tosafot (Shabbat 119b) cite a story from the Midrash about Rabbi Yishmael Kohen Gadol, who was shown how the dreadful punishments that are decreed upon Beneh Yisrael are avoided in the merit of the response of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." And the Zohar states that the sign of a great Torah scholar is if he fervently looks for opportunities to respond to Kaddish. If a person rushes out of the synagogue before the final Kaddish, then even if he is a scholar, he cannot be considered a true Talmid Hacham. The Gaon of Vilna (1720-1797) writes that those who answer "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" will be spared the suffering from the upheavals that will occur before the arrival of Mashiah. The Mishna Berura cites a passage from the Midrash describing Hashem's reaction when Jews assemble to learn Torah and then recite Kaddish – He turns to angels and exclaims, "See how My children praise me!" Importantly, however, Rav Moshe Zakuta (1625-1697) writes that one must respond "Amen" with Kavana (concentration). If a person answers mindlessly, without paying attention, then he is included, Heaven forbid, in G-d's warning, "U'bozai Yekalu" – that those who disgrace Him will be shamed (Shemuel I 2:30). It is told that Rav Mordechai Gifter (1915-2001), the esteemed Rosh Yeshiva of Telz in Cleveland, once traveled with eight students to Toronto for a wedding. They were altogether nine men, and thus could not form a Minyan, but they assumed that they would have time upon arriving in Toronto to join a Minyan for Minha. As it happened, however, the plane made an emergency landing in some small town between Cleveland and Toronto. The group needed to recite Minha there, despite not having a Minyan. To their astonishment, a worker in the airport approached them as they were starting to pray and informed them that he was Jewish and wished to join them. He could not even read Hebrew, but he told the group that he wanted to recite Kaddish, and he needed their help. They made a Minyan, and helped him recite Kaddish. Afterward, Rav Gifter spoke to him and asked why he, a Jew without any religious background, wished to pray and recite Kaddish. The man explained that his father passed away several days earlier. The night before he met this group in the airport, his father came to him in a dream and told him he needed him to recite Kaddish for him. The man asked his father how he could recite Kaddish, as he lived in a town without a Jewish community. "Don't' worry," his father said, "tomorrow I'll send you a Minyan so you can recite Kaddish." This story demonstrates how everything happens for a purpose, and that nothing is random – but additionally, it teaches us the importance of Kaddish, and the great benefit it brings to the soul of the deceased when the children recite Kaddish.

The Bet Yosef cites the Shiboleh Ha'leket (Rav Sidkiya Ha'rofeh, Italy, 13 th century) as establishing that one should hear at least seven Kaddish recitations each day. This is inferred from the verse in Tehillim (119:164), "Sheba Ba'yom Hilalticha" – "I have praised You seven times each day." By contrast, the Arizal maintained that one should hear at least twelve daily Kaddish recitations. Our customary prayer service is arranged in such a way that a total of thirteen Kaddishim are recited. In the morning, "Kaddish Al Yisrael" is recited before Hodu, "Hasi Kaddish" is recited after Yishtabah, another "Hasi Kaddish" is recited after the Hazzan's repetition of the Amida, "Kaddish Titkabal" is recited after "U'ba Le'sion," another Kaddish is recited after the daily Shir Shel Yom, and then "Kaddish Al Yisrael" is recited before Alenu, for a total of six Kaddishim. At Minha, another three Kaddishim are recited – the "Hasi Kaddish" before the Amida, the "Kaddish Titkabal" following the repetition of the Amida, and another Kaddish after La'menase'ah Bi'nginot, before Alenu. An additional four Kaddishim are recited at Arbit, bringing the total to thirteen: before Barechu, before the Amida, after the Amida, and before Alenu. These thirteen Kaddishim correspond to the thirteen attributes of divine mercy. In some communities, Kaddish is not recited after La'menase'ah Bi'nginot at Minha, such that they recite a total of twelve Kaddishim, following the teaching of the Arizal. In Ashkenazic communities, Kaddish is recited also after Alenu. This custom is followed in some Moroccan and Tunisian communities, as well. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) cites the Arizal as explaining how the various Kaddish recitations serve to facilitate our transition between the different spiritual realms. We cannot proceed immediately from our current realm – the realm of Asiya – to the highest realm, the realm of Asilut, where we stand before G-d and pray the Amida. We need to ascend incrementally, and it is through the Kaddish recitation that we advance from one realm to the next. The first "jump" occurs with the "Kaddish Al Yisrael" before Hodu, which elevates us to the realm of Yesira. The Kaddish after Yishtabah then lifts us to the realm of Beri'a. As no interruption is permitted during the section of "Yoser Or" until after the Amida, we ascend to the highest realm, Asilut, for the Amida prayer without a Kaddish. We then "descend" back to the realm of Beri'a with the "Hasi Kaddish" recited after the Amida, and then to Yesira with the Kaddish after U'ba Le'sion. Finally, the Kaddish following the Shir Shel Yom brings us back down to the realm of Asiya.

There are several different kinds of Kaddish, the first of which is commonly known as "Hasi Kaddish" – "half-Kaddish." The term "Hasi Kaddish" is actually a misnomer, as the text of this Kaddish is in fact the complete original text, composed either by the Ansheh Kenesset Ha'gedola (Men of the Great Assembly) at the beginning of the Second Commonwealth, or several generations later, by the Tanna'im. The prayers added to the other Kaddish texts were introduced later, during the period of the Geonim or the period of the Rishonim. These other texts are known to us as "Kaddish Titkabal," "Kaddish Yeheh Shelama," and "Kaddish Al Yisrael" (which is also referred to as "Kaddish De'Rabbanan"). "Kaddish Titkabal" includes a request that our prayers be answered, and it is recited after the Amida prayer, and after Shelihot. "Kaddish Yeheh Shelama" is said after the recitation of a text of Torah She'bi'chtab (Tanach), such as following an Arayat. Finally, "Kaddish Al Yisrael" is recited after a session of studying Torah She'be'al Peh (the oral Torah), such as Mishna or Gemara. This text contains a prayer for the wellbeing of the Torah scholars and their students (which is why this Kaddish is also known as "Kaddish De'Rabbanan" – the Rabbis' Kaddish). We recite this Kaddish in the morning after the Korbanot section, which includes the Mishnayot of "Ezehu Mekoman" and the Berayta of Rabbi Yishmael. It is recited again at the end of the prayer service, following the recitation of the Ketoret text which includes passages from the Gemara. This final "Kaddish Al Yisrael" after the Ketoret is known as "Kaddish Yatom" – the mourner's Kaddish, as it is recited by those in mourning for a parent. The Arizal taught that the recitation of this Kaddish by a mourner has the ability to extricate the parent from Gehinnom and bring him or her to Gan Eden. These final three Kaddish texts conclude with a prayer for peace and material blessings. The Rabbis explain that we first pray that "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash Shemeh Rabba" – that G-d's Name should be glorified and become known throughout the world, before proceeding to ask for our personal needs. This is based on the concept that we must first pray for G-d's sake, so-to-speak, for the glory of His Name, and in this merit our personal requests will be granted. The Tur (Rabbenu Yaakob Ben Asher, Germany-Spain, 1269-1343) brings a teaching of the Midrash that if a person includes in his prayers the plea that Hashem should act for the sake of His Name ("Aseh Lema'an Shemecha, Aseh Lema'an Yeminecha…"), then he will be given the merit to greet the Shechina. We should pray not only for our own benefit, but also for the sake of the glorification of G-d's Name. This notion is alluded to in the first four words of Kaddish – "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash Shemeh Rabba." These words begin with the letters Yod, Vav, Shin and Resh, which have the combined numerical value of 516. The Sages teach that Moshe Rabbenu prayed 515 times for the privilege of entering the Land of Israel, whereupon G-d commanded him to stop praying. Some commentators explain that Moshe was told to stop because if he had recited a 516 th prayer, then his prayer would have been accepted (and it was decreed that Moshe must not go into the land). Moshe prayed solely for the purpose of "Yitgadal Ve'yitkadash Shemeh Rabba," for the sake of the glorification of the divine Name, and not for his personal benefit, and his prayer therefore would have deserved to be accepted. When our intentions are sincere, when we pray for our needs so we can succeed in our mission in the world, the mission of bringing honor to the Almighty, then we are worthy of having our prayers answered.

Numerous different theories have been advanced to explain why the Kaddish prayer was written in Aramaic, and not in Hebrew. One reason given is based on the tradition that angels do not understand Aramaic. Kaddish is such a precious and valuable prayer that the angels would feel envious if they heard us recite it and they understood its meaning. This prayer was therefore composed in a language which the angels cannot understand. The Mahzor Vitri (Rabbenu Simha of Vitri, France, d. 1105) questioned this explanation, noting that there are many other beautiful and precious prayers which we recite that were written in Hebrew, without any concern that the angels might become envious. (We might also question how angels, which are perfect beings, can experience jealousy, a human flaw. Perhaps, envy over spiritual achievements is a laudable quality, and this feeling can be experienced by angels.) A second theory is that Kaddish is written in Aramaic as a reminder of the Babylonian exile. We emphasize to Hashem that He destroyed the Bet Ha'mikdash and drove us into a foreign land, where we spoke a foreign language, and we hope that this will lead Hashem to regret His decision and bring us back. If the angels understood this prayer, they would respond by pointing out our misdeeds, arguing that we are unworthy of redemption, and so we recite Kaddish in a language which the angels do not understand. Another reason given is that many of the people who would attend Torah classes were simple laymen who did not understand Hebrew. Therefore, the Kaddish recited after Torah classes was written in Aramaic for their benefit, so they would understand this prayer. It seems that according to this reason, the other Kaddish recitations were modeled after the Kaddish recited after Torah classes. The Maharam Me'Rotenberg (c. 1215-1293) suggested that we recite Kaddish in Aramaic to express our grief over the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash. Just as a mourner changes out of his fine garments and wears simple clothing as an expression of mourning, we, too, change the language from Hebrew, the sacred tongue, to the inferior Aramaic, as an expression of anguish. (Incidentally, some sources explain similarly why we begin the Haggadah at the Seder in Aramaic, reciting "Ha Lahma Anya." As we sit down to the Seder, we are cognizant of the fact that we are meant to celebrate this occasion in Jerusalem, with the Korban Pesach. We therefore begin the Seder in a foreign language, expressing our grief that we observe Pesach in exile.) Rabbi Binyamin Ben Abraham (Italy, 13 th century), as cited by his brother, the Shiboleh Ha'leket (Rabbi Sidkiya Ha'rofeh), suggested that the gentile authorities at a certain point forbade the Jews from reciting Kaddish. The Jews therefore began reciting it in Aramaic, so the authorities would not realize that they were reciting this prayer. The Kolbo (anonymous work from the period of the Rishonim) offered two explanations, one assuming that Aramaic was widely known at the time of Kaddish's composition, and one assuming that it was not. If it was widely known, he writes, then Kaddish may have been written in this language specifically for the purpose of spreading its message far and wide, to demonstrate to the entire world, including the gentiles, our belief in our ultimate redemption, when Hashem's Name will be glorified throughout the world. Conversely, if Aramaic was not widely known, then perhaps it is recited in Aramaic because the angels might otherwise understand the prayer and thus prosecute against us. The Kaddish speaks of the time of the future redemption, and at that time, the righteous will be granted a greater position of stature than the angels. Since we human beings must struggle against our evil inclination to faithfully observe G-d, those who succeed and serve G-d properly deserve far more reward than the angels, who are created perfect, without sinful impulses. If the angels would understand the Kaddish, which speaks of the time of the final redemption, they might proceed to prosecute against us to ensure that the righteous would not be given a more distinguished position in the future. Kaddish is therefore recited in Aramaic, a language which the angels do not understand.

The Aruch Ha'shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein, 1829-1908) writes that the text of the Kaddish prayer was likely written by the Ansheh Kenesset Ha'gedola ("Men of the Great Assembly") during the first years of the Second Commonwealth. This prayer expresses the wish that G-d's Name should be glorified and become known throughout the world. The destruction of the first Bet Ha'mikdash marked a grave Hilul Hashem – desecration of G-d's Name – and so when Jews returned to their land and began rebuilding the Temple, the Rabbis composed this special prayer that the glory of G-d's Name should be restored. The Yalkut Yosef (Hebrew edition) notes that this theory might be supported by the Gemara's comment (Berachot 33a) that our prayers and blessings were written by the Ansheh Kenesset Ha'gedola. However, as noted by Rav Yisrael Bitan, the Gemara did not specifically mention Kaddish, and thus this proof is not conclusive. In any event, this is the opinion followed also by Rav Shlomo of Worms (Germany, d. 1096), in his Siddur. He explains that after seventy years in Babylonian exile, the Jews' primary language was Aramaic, instead of Hebrew, and for this reason the Kaddish text was written in Aramaic. A different view is presented by the Orhot Haim (Rav Aharon of Lunel, late 13 th -early 14 th century), who maintained that the Kaddish text was written several generations later, by the Tanna'im. The unique significance of the Kaddish prayer, and its precious value, is clearly expressed in several passages in the Gemara. In Masechet Berachot (3a), the Gemara tells that Rabbi Yossi was once traveling and stopped to pray in one of the ruins of Jerusalem. While he was there, he heard a voice weeping and lamenting, "Woe unto the children because of whose iniquities I destroyed My home, burned My sanctuary, and exiled them among the nations." Afterward, he was informed by Eliyahu the Prophet that this cry is sounded three times each day. However, Eliyahu added, when Jews assemble in synagogues and study halls and pronounce in Kaddish, "Yeheh Shemeh," the Almighty "nods His head," so-to-speak, and regrets having driven the Jewish People into exile. The Kaddish recitation thus arouses G-d's love and compassion, and brings the final redemption closer. Moreover, the Gemara teaches in Masechet Shabbat (119b) that if one answers "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba" with all his might, harsh decrees that were issued against him are rescinded. And the Gemara states in Masechet Sota (49a) that since the destruction of the Bet Ha'mikdash, the world's condition has been increasingly worsening, yet the world survives in the merit of "Kiddusha De'sidra" and the Kaddish recited after Torah study. ("Kiddusha De'sidra" refers to the section known to us as "U'ba Le'sion," when we cite several verses followed by their Aramaic translation.) Rav Amram Gaon (9 th century) tells that Rabbi Yishmael was once shown by an angel the horrific tragedies that were decreed to befall the Jewish People. The angel explained that new decrees are issued against the Jews every day, but these decrees are left unfulfilled in the merit of the Jews' recitation of "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." There was once a member of our community who suffered a stroke, and the family, who heard of the great power of Kaddish to annul harsh decrees, brought a Minyan to the rehabilitation center. They prayed there with the patient, ensuring to have special Kavana (concentration) when responding "Yeheh Shemeh Rabba." The patient quickly recovered, returned to work, and lived for many years – a clear demonstration of the special power of Kaddish.

Normally, a person who hears Kaddish or Nakdishach may respond even if he hears from a distance, and is not present with the Minyan. There are, however, exceptions to this rule. The Shulhan Aruch writes that a person standing outside a synagogue may respond to Kaddish or Nakdishach, but then adds that according to some opinions, this is not allowed if there is "Tinuf" (filth, such as a trash can), or a non-Jew, in between him and the congregation. At first glance, it appears that the Shulhan Aruch here cites two different opinions, and according to the first opinion, one may respond even if there is "Tinuf" or a non-Jew in between him and the Minyan. If so, then we follow the general rule that the Shulhan Aruch accepts the first opinion when he brings two different views, and thus one may may respond regardless of what is between him and the congregation. Hacham Ovadia Yosef, however, understands the Shulhan Aruch as clarifying his initial statement, and not as citing a dissenting view. Therefore, one may not, in fact, respond to Kaddish or Nakdishach if there is either "Tinuf" or a gentile in between him and the Minyan. The word used by the Shulhan Aruch in this context is "Akum," an acrostic that refers either to an idol – "Avodat Kochabim U'mazalot" – or to an idolater – "Obed Kochabim U'mazalot." The Magen Abraham (Rav Avraham Gombiner, Poland, 1635-1682) understood that the acrostic "Akum" in this context refers to an idol, and not to a gentile. According to this reading, a non-Jew does not interrupt between a Minyan and a person listening from a distance, and he may respond. However, Hacham Ovadia notes that in earlier editions of the Shulhan Aruch, the word used in this passage was not "Akum," but rather "Goy." It is clear that the word was changed as a result of censorship, as Jewish communities needed to avoid giving the impression of looking disdainfully upon their non-Jewish neighbors, and so texts that might be misunderstood as such were occasionally emended. Hence, the Magen Abraham's reading is incorrect, and even the presence of a non-Jew in between a person and the Minyan creates an interruption, preventing him from responding. Since the Shulhan Aruch used the word "Goy" – "gentile" – and not "Obed Kochabim" – "idolater," this Halacha applies to all gentiles, even to those who do not worship idols. The Rambam famously ruled that Muslims are not considered idol-worshippers, since they believe in a single Deity who created the world. For the purposes of this Halacha, however, the non-Jew's religious beliefs are irrelevant, and his presence is considered an obstruction regarding the ability to respond to Kaddish and Nakdishach. The Magen Abraham and Mishna Berura asserted that the Rama (Rav Moshe Isserles, Cracow, 1530-1572) disputed this entire Halacha, and maintained that the presence of filth or of a gentile does not affect the ability to respond to Kaddish or Nakdishach. Nevertheless, Sephardic practice follows the Shulhan Aruch's ruling. It must be noted that this entire discussion refers to the case of a person who is not inside together with the Minyan, and there is a gentile in between him and the Minyan. In such a case, the presence of the Shechina needs to extend from the Minyan to the person standing at a distance, and this extension can be obstructed. A gentile's presence inside the Minyan, however, has no effect whatsoever. If, for example, a political figure is visiting the synagogue, or a congregant has a non-Jewish aide helping him in the synagogue, it is certainly permissible for everyone to respond to all the prayers, even if the non-Jew stands in between a person and the Hazzan. Although there is an opinion among the Poskim that is stringent in this regard, the consensus follows the lenient position. One example where this problem arises was noted by the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), who describes how it was common in Baghdad for merchants to display their wares in the hallways of synagogues. If a person was in the hallway of such a synagogue, he needed to ensure that the non-Jewish merchant was not standing in between him and the sanctuary. Another situation where this could arise is an airport. If ten men find an area to pray, and someone joins their Minyan from a distance, he may not answer unless he ensures that no gentiles come in between him and the Minyan. This could arise also when a person hosts a catered event in his home, and a Minyan is formed in the living room. If someone wishes to participate in the Minyan from the kitchen, he must ensure that non-Jewish workers are not standing in between him and the Minyan. Some Poskim place a very significant limitation on this entire Halacha, maintaining that it applies only if the person can see the "Tinuf" or the non-Jew in between him and the Minyan. But if, for example, a person lives near a synagogue, and he hears the prayers through the window, then he may respond even if there is "Tinuf" or a gentile in between. This is the view taken by the Gaon of Vilna (1720-1797) and by Rav Shlomo Zurafa (Algeria, 1785-1859). Although others seem to disagree with this ruling, it is accepted as Halacha by Hacham Ovadia Yosef, in Yehaveh Da'at, and by his son, Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura. This Halacha becomes relevant in the case of a person who hears a live broadcast of a prayer service. Some congregations arrange a livestream of the Tefila for the benefit of those who are unable to attend due to health reasons, or for those in remote areas without a Minyan. The accepted Halacha is that although one cannot fulfill his obligation to recite a text – such as the reading of Megilat Ester on Purim – by listening via telephone or some other communication system, one can respond to Berachot, Kaddish and Nakdishach if he hears the recitation through a live broadcast. Quite obviously, there is "Tinuf" and gentiles in between the individual listening to a broadcast and the synagogue miles away where the prayers are being recited. Nevertheless, Hacham Ovadia ruled that one may respond, in light of the aforementioned ruling that everything in between may be disregarded if it cannot be seen. A Minyan may be formed even though non-Jews live in the same building, above the Minyan. Hacham Ovadia writes that there is no source whatsoever for the notion that the presence of gentiles above a Minyan obstructs the prayers from ascending to the heavens. Therefore, it is entirely permissible to pray on a ground floor even though gentiles are present above the Minyan. Summary: If a person hears Kaddish or Nakdishach from outside the area where the Minyan takes place, he may respond, unless there is "Tinuf" (filth) or a non-Jew in between him and the Minyan. If, however, the "Tinuf" or the gentile cannot be seen – such as if a person hears a Minyan from a window in his home – then he may respond. Therefore, a person who hears a Minyan via livestream may respond. A gentile's presence in the synagogue, or in the area where the Minyan is held, has no effect, and everyone in the room may respond.

If a person prays outside the room where the Minyan is taking place, or in an adjoining room, and he hears the entire service and fully participates, does he receive the same credit for praying with a Minyan as those inside the sanctuary? Halacha establishes that men in a different room – or, for that matter, in the ladies' section – cannot be counted toward the Minyan, as ten men must be together in the same room to form a Minyan. But once a Minyan is formed, are those outside the room considered to be praying with a Minyan? The Hida (Rav Haim Yosef David Azulai, 1724-1806), in his Mahazik Beracha, cites the Malki Ba'kodesh (Rav Ezra Malki, 1710-1768) as stating that those who pray together with a Minyan, and can hear the Hazzan, are credited with praying with a Minyan even if they are not in the room. By contrast, the Hayeh Adam (Rav Abraham Danzig, Vilna, 1748-1820) maintained that one is not considered to pray with a Minyan unless he prays in the room where the Minyan is taking place. An intriguing middle position is taken by the Radbaz (Rav David Ben Zimra, Egypt, 1479-1573). He rules that a person outside the room is considered to pray with a Minyan if people in the Minyan need to pass through his location in order to exit. Thus, for example, if a person prays in a hallway outside the sanctuary, and the people in the sanctuary need to pass through that hallway to leave the building, then the sanctuary and the hallway are sufficiently connected for him to be viewed as part of the Minyan. If, however, the people do not need to go through his area to exit – such as if he prays in the ladies' section, or in an adjoining room – then he is not considered to pray with a Minyan. As for the final Halacha, both the Aruch Ha'shulhan (Rav Yechiel Michel Epstein, 1829-1908) and the Hazon Ish (Rav Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz, 1878-1953) wrote that one may follow the lenient position. This is the conclusion also of Hacham David Yosef, in Halacha Berura. Therefore, one who can hear the Hazzan and participates with the Minyan receives credit for praying with a Minyan even if he is not in the room where the Minyan is taking place.

If a person happens to be in the vicinity of a prayer service, and he hears Kaddish, Barechu or Nakdishach, is he required to answer? The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909) seems to indicate that one who hears these parts of the service is required to respond, even if he is in a different room and not part of the Minyan. By contrast, several other Poskim, including Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Jerusalem, 1924-1998), maintained that although one is permitted to respond in such a case, this is not obligatory. Rav Shmuel Wosner (1913-2015), in Shebet Ha'levi, writes that if a person is learning Torah near a Minyan, and responding to Kaddish and the other prayers would disrupt his study, then he does not need to respond. Thus, although it is certainly worthwhile to respond to Kaddish, Barechu and Nakdishach, as each response fulfills a Misva and is very significant, this is not obligatory, and one does not need to interrupt his Torah learning for this purpose.