ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafBerachos 26
(a) No! It is not permitted to Daven facing an open bathroom, even if there
is no Tzo'ah inside, or in front of an open bath-house which is not
currently being used.
(b) When Rav Chisda permitted one to Daven in front of a bathroom, he was
referring to a new bath-room that has not yet been used.
(c) Ravina's Sha'aleh, whether designating a bathroom renders it forbidden
or not, concerns, not Davening *in front* of a new bathroom, but Davening
*inside it*, which Ravina thought might be forbidden.
(a) The Persian bathrooms were considered covered - even when there was
Tzo'ah, and it was permitted to recite the Shema in front of them.
(b) That is because the hole was situated at the end of a slope, so that
the Tzo'ah would roll away and end up out of sight and of smell.
(a) We might have thought that Rebbi Yehudah would agree that a Meshameshes
who saw Nidus is obligated to Tovel, since she was already obligated to
Tovel before she saw Nidus (unlike the first two cases, who were already
Tamei and Patur from Tevilah, when they saw Keri).
Hadran Alach, 'Mi she'Meiso'!
(b) However, we cannot say that, because that would mean that the Tana
mentions the third case because of the Chachamim. But why should the
Chachamim need even to mention it? If the first two cases are Chayav to
Tovel, it is obvious that the woman in the third case is Chayav. It is only
if Rebbi Yehudah argues with the Chachamim in this case too, that the Tana
needs to insert it to inform us that here too, Rebbi Yehudah exempts her
from Tevilah, in spite of the fact that her obligation to Tovel came first.
(a) Rebbi Yehudah holds that one may Daven Shachris up to four hours, and
Minchah up to P'lag ha'Minchah.
(b) One may Daven Ma'ariv all night, and Musaf all day (according to the Tana
of our Mishnah).
(c) Someone who forgot to Daven Shachris should Daven Minchah twice (first
Minchah and then the Tashlumin for Shachris). He will not however, receive
reward for Tefilah bi'Zemano, only for Tefilah. For Tefilah bi'Zemano, one
has to Daven *before mid-day* like the ruling of our Mishnah (according to
(d) We might have thought that one cannot be Yotze for a missed Minchah
through a Tashlumin at Ma'ariv, since, as we shall see later, the Tefilos
follow the pattern of the Korbanos, and by the Korbanos, we have a
principle 'Avar Yomo, Batel Korbano'.
(a) It is only possible to make up for a Tefilah that was deficient through
a mistake (i.e. if one forgot to Daven - not by accident, in which case, no
Tashlumin is necessary). A Tefilah that was omitted on purpose, is a
"Me'uvas Lo Yuchal Liskon".
(b) This is evident from the wording in the Beraisa of "Me'uvas" etc.,
which uses the expression - 'she'Biteil' (which implies on purpose) instead
of 'she'Ta'ah' (which would have meant 'by mistake').
(c) "ve'Chesaron Lo Yuchal Lehimanos" refers to someone who fails to join
his friends, when they group together to perform a Mitzvah - it is an
(a) Someone who forgot to Daven Minchah on Friday afternoon, must Daven the
Amidah for Shabbos Ma'ariv twice.
(b) Someone who is Davening two Amidos on Motzei Shabbos, because he forgot
to Daven Minchah, must Daven first the Amidah for Motzei Shabbos - with
Havdalah, and then the Tashlumin, without Havdalah. This is because one is
always obligated to Daven the current Tefilah before the Tashlumin.
(c) If he inverted the order, and inserted Havdalah in the second Amidah,
then he is Yotze only with the second Amidah, the Amidah for Motzei
Shabbos, but not the Tashlumin, which he must now repeat.
The Gemara gives the reason that he was not Yotze with the first Tefilah
(for his Motzei Shabbos obligation) is because he omitted Havdalah, and
someone who omits Havdalah is not Yotzei.
(d) The Beraisa explicitly writes that someone who omits Havdalah is
nevertheless Yotze Tefilah, so how can the Gemara say that he was not Yotze
with the first Tefilah, because he omitted Havdalah.
Although the Gemara remains with a Kashya, explains the Rosh, the answer is
nevertheless plain (the Gemara does not say 'Tiyuvta', which implies that
there is no answer, but 'Kashya', from which we can infer that they had an
The real reason that one is not Yotze is not that stated in the Gemara, but
because, by omitting Havdalah from the first Tefilah and inserting it in
the second, it is clear that he intended to invert the order of the Tefilos
and to Daven the Tashlumin first, in which case one is not even Yotze
(a)&(b) Someone who forgot either 'Mashiv ha'Ruach' or 've'Sein Tal
u'Matar' (and who has finished the Amidah in the latter case, and even the
third Berachah of 'ha'Keil ha'Kadosh' in the former, must repeat the
(a) Avraham instituted Shachris - from "va'Yashkeim Avraham ba'Boker el
ha'Makom Asher Amad Sham" (and 'Amidah' means Tefilah).
Yitzchak, Minchah - from "va'Yeitzei Yitzchak la'Su'ach ba'Sadeh".
Ya'akov instituted Ma'ariv - from "va'Yifga ba'Makom, va'Yalen Sham".
(b) According to Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi, it was not the Avos who
instituted Tefilah, but the Anshei Kenesses ha'Gedolah, who introduced
Tefilah, corresponding to the bi'daily Korban Tamid.
(c) Shachris corresponds to the Korban Tamid shel Boker, which had to be
brought by mid-day according to the Chachamim, and by four hours according
to Rebbi Yehudah. (Likewise, they argue over the final time for Tefilas
(d) Minchah corresponds to the Korban Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim. Just like
with Shachris, this has ramifications regarding the time of Tefilas
According to the Chachamim, both are Kasher until nightfall, and according
to Rebbi Yehudah, until P'lag ha'Minchah.
(a) Tefilas Ma'ariv corresponds to the burning of the limbs and the
fat-pieces that remained from the day Korbanos, and which could be burnt
all night. Similarly, one basically has all night in which to Daven
Ma'ariv. Another Halachic off-shoot of the connection between Tefilas
Ma'ariv and the burning of the fat-pieces is the fact that Ma'ariv is
Reshus, in the same way as burning the limbs was (in the sense that if
there were no limbs, then there was no Mitzvah).
(b) The Eivarim constitute all the limbs of the Olah; the Pedarim the
fat-pieces of other Korbanos, whose limbs were eaten.
(a) Minchah Gedolah is half an hour after mid-day, It is the earliest time
that one may Daven Minchah, because it was also the earliest time that one
could bring the Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim. This is because that is when
the evening shadows begin to stretch (so it is included in 'Bein
(b) Minchah Ketanah is from two and half hours before night - the time that
the Korban Tamid shel Bein ha'Arbayim was normally brought each day.
(c) P'lag ha'Minchah is half of Minchah Ketanah i.e. one and a quarter
hours before night. It is the final time for Minchah, according to Rebbi
Yehudah ,and the earliest time for Ma'ariv.
(d) If the Anshei Kenesses ha'Gedolah did not have a hand in the
institution of the Tefilos (only the Avos), then why would we Daven Musaf?
Even Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina therefore, has to agree that they too,
re-instituted the Tefilos correspond to the bi'daily Korban Tamid and the
(a) The Sha'aleh whether according to Rebbi, 'Ad' is inclusive or
exclusive, is simply whether the whole fourth hour is included in the time
for Tefilas Shachris, or only until the beginning of the fourth hour.
According to the Rabbanan, someone who has to Daven both Musaf and Minchah,
should first Daven Minchah, in view of the fact that it is more common,
and, in their opinion, he has until nightfall to Daven both Tefilos.
(b) Thinking that P'lag ha'Minchah refers to the second half of the last
three hours, the Gemara proves that 'Ad' must be exclusive, because, if it
was inclusive, then 'Ad P'lag ha'Minchah' would mean until nightfall, in
which case Rebbi Yehudah would not be arguing with the Rabbanan.
(c) On the other hand, if 'Ad' is exclusive, how will we understand Rebbi's
Yehudah's statement that one may Daven Musaf only 'Ad Sheva Sha'os'.
Now, if 'Ad' is exclusive, then 'Ad' Sheva Sha'os will mean until the
beginning of the seventh hour (mid-day).
But Rebbi Yehudah rules that, if someone has to Daven Musaf and Minchah,
then he should Daven first Musaf, whose time is limited, and then Minchah,
for which he still has a few hours. This only makes sense if 'Ad Sheva
Sha'os' *includes* the seventh hour, because then there is a half-hour
overlap between Minchah Gedolah and the end of the seventh hour. Whereas if
'Ad Sheva Sha'os' would be exclusive, then the time to Daven Musaf would
end at mid-day, and that of Minchah would only begin a half hour later, in
which case he would never have such a dilemma (so how could Rebbi Yehudah
discuss which of the two comes first)?
(d) When Rebbi Yehudah gives a person until P'lag ha'Minchah, he is not
referring to the latter half of Minchah Ketanah, but to the former half,
and 'P'lag' is indeed inclusive.