Siman 122

The Tur wrote: The nineteenth blessing is "Sim Shalom." And they instituted it after the Priestly Blessing, as it is written: "And they shall place My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them." And the blessing of the Holy One, blessed be He, is "peace," as it is written: "The Lord will give strength to His people, the Lord will bless His people with peace." Thus far his words. And it is taught at the end of Tractate Derech Eretz in the chapter "Great is Peace" that the prayer concludes with "peace." And the number of words in this blessing was not counted by the Tur nor in the Peri Etz Chaim. And it contains fifty-three words, and for those who say "chayim chen vachesed verachamim" there are fifty-four words. (And it seems to me that this corresponds to the verse: "And a spirit clothed Amasai..." until "and peace," see there. And they contain fifty-three letters. But this verse is in Chronicles (I 12:19), and every "David" in Chronicles is full with a yod, and it would be fifty-four letters. And both versions are reconciled well. Examine and you will find it simple.)

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote: If one comes to interrupt and answer Kaddish and Kedushah between the Shemoneh Esreh and "Yihyu Lertzon" – he does not interrupt, for "Yihyu Lertzon" is part of the prayer. But between "Yihyu Lertzon" and other supplications – it is well and good. Thus far his words. And there is no novelty in this, for are supplications an obligation of the prayer? Rather, he teaches us: for example, we who always say one supplication, namely "Elohai Netzor," and there was room to say that we have accepted it upon ourselves as the obligation of the eighteen blessings, and one should not interrupt during it – he teaches us that it is permitted to interrupt in order to answer Kaddish… And it appears that even to answer "Amen" is permitted, for even though he compares it to the blessings of Kiryat Shema as will be explained, nevertheless it is not exactly so. (See Taz, subsection 1, and his words require investigation, for according to what I have written it settles well with good reason. And I do not know his reason. Examine it and you will find it simple.) (And that which forced me to this interpretation will be explained in section 3).

And afterward he wrote: However, one who is accustomed to saying supplications after his prayer, if the shliach tzibbur began to arrange his prayer, and he reached Kaddish or Kedushah—he shortens and concludes. And if he did not shorten—he may interrupt in the manner that one interrupts in the blessings of Keriat Shema, even in the middle. Thus far his words. The explanation of his words is as follows: For certainly it is a mitzvah and an obligation to say "Yihyu L'ratzon" immediately after "Who blesses His people Israel with peace," for our sages, of blessed memory, ordained to say beforehand "O Lord, open my lips..." and at the end "Yihyu L'ratzon." And just as it is forbidden to interrupt between "O Lord, open my lips" and the first blessing, so too it is forbidden to interrupt between the final blessing and "Yihyu L'ratzon." And in truth, one must conduct himself so, and so conduct themselves all the talmidei chachamim. And one who wishes to say "Yihyu L'ratzon" once more after the supplications—he may say it, and there are those who conduct themselves so. (And so wrote the Magen Avraham, subsection 1, in the name of K"H and L"H.)

And this is what he wrote afterward in section 2, and this is his wording: It is not proper to say supplications before "May the words of my mouth be acceptable." Rather, after the conclusion of the Shemoneh Esrei, he should say "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" immediately. And if he wishes to go back and say it another time after the supplications—he has permission to do so. Thus far his words. However, the matter of supplications depends: for one who does not make them a fixed practice to say them always, or who sometimes says this supplication and sometimes another—for behold, in the Gemara there are many supplications that each one would say after the prayer—and if he conducts himself so, then interruption there is completely permitted. However, one who is accustomed to saying one supplication always, and it has become like an obligation upon him, like us who have adopted the prayer "My God, guard my tongue" always, and it is like an obligation upon us; therefore, granted that it is not exactly like the Shemoneh Esrei, nevertheless, it has the law of "the middle of the prayer." And this is what our teacher, the Beit Yosef, says: "However, one who is accustomed to saying...", meaning with regularity, one supplication, and it has become like an obligation upon him, even if he said "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" beforehand, nevertheless it is not an interruption. And therefore it is better to be brief and say "He who makes peace." However, if he was not brief—he may interrupt as one does in the blessings of Kiryat Shema, and it is not exactly like the Shemoneh Esrei prayer. And we have already written that he may even answer a plain "Amen." But an interruption for another matter is forbidden, for behold, he has not yet uprooted his feet. However, in any event, the intention of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, is even when he said "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" before the supplications. (And see Magen Avraham, subsection 2, who wrote: And if there is no time to step back—he should say "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" immediately and answer. Thus far his words. I wonder that he transcribed this from the words of the Rema in Darkei Moshe, for behold, the Rema does not hold so, as will be explained. And the Beit Yosef, behold, he holds that one is compelled to say "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" before the supplications. And it requires further study. And examine carefully and you will find it easy.)

However, our teacher, the Rema, regarding that which one does not interrupt for Kaddish and Kedushah between the Shemoneh Esrei and "Yihyu Lertzon," wrote on this, and this is his wording: And specifically in a place where they are accustomed to say "Yihyu Lertzon" immediately after the prayer. But in a place where they are accustomed to say supplications before "Yihyu Lertzon" – one also interrupts for Kaddish and Kedushah. And in these places, they are accustomed to interrupt in "Elohai Netzor" before "Yihyu Lertzon," and therefore they also interrupt for Kaddish and Kedushah and "Barchu." Thus far his words. And behold, several of the great authorities cried out against him like a crane, for how is it possible not to say "Yihyu Lertzon" immediately after the Shemoneh Esrei? (Taz, and Bach, and Lechem Chamudot, and so it is implied from Magen Avraham subsection 1 and from Eliyah Rabbah.)

And certainly justice is with them that this is the preferred way, and whoever wishes may say it also after the supplications. However, our teacher, the Rema, was a lover of Israel, and since such was the custom in his days – he did not want to make them like those who transgress the law of the Gemara. And also in our time, I have heard that the majority of the masses of Israel do not say "yihyu leratzon" until after "elokai netzor." Therefore, it is necessary to settle the matter. And behold, one who examines the Tur will see explicitly that he also holds thus, not to say "yihyu leratzon" until after the supplications, for he wrote: And after he finished the eighteen blessings before "elokai netzor" – he may answer Kaddish… Thus far his words. And there is one who wrote that his intention was after he finished the eighteen blessings and after he said "yihyu leratzon" (Bach). And besides the forced nature of this, as it is the way of the Tur to explain and not to be obscure, it is further difficult: for if so, what is he teaching us? And although for our teacher, the Beit Yosef, we answered this, that was because he preceded by saying that one does not interrupt before "yihyu leratzon." But the Tur did not mention this at all. And so too later in this siman the Tur wrote: After "aseh lema'an shemekha" – "yihyu leratzon." See there. And if it should enter your mind that he also said this earlier, why is it necessary afterward? And granted that we wrote that he may say it, nevertheless there is no obligation. And why must we bring proof from the Tur? From the Gemara (17a) it is explicitly so, as it says there: Mar the son of Ravina, when he would finish his prayer, would say thus: "elokai netzor leshoni mera…, and frustrate their designs. Yihyu leratzon…" See there. Behold explicitly that the "yihyu leratzon" is after "elokai netzor." And perhaps because of this we chose the prayer of "elokai netzor" from all the prayers in the Gemara, because in it it is explicit that the "yihyu leratzon" is afterward.

And the matter is thus when we are precise, for the Tur wrote in the name of Rav Amram Gaon, and this is his wording: From here on, after the eighteen blessings – it is forbidden to recount the praise of the Omnipresent, as it is written: "Who can express...". But if one wishes to say after his prayer "Our King...", "My God, before I was formed...", "My God, guard" until "my Rock and my Redeemer." Thus far his words. And it must be understood: for if it is after "May the words of my mouth be acceptable," let him say what he wishes, and if it is because he has not yet stepped back – behold we say explicitly in the Gemara that after the prayer one may say even like the order of Yom Kippur. Furthermore: what is this that he wrote "until my Rock and my Redeemer"? Rather, it is certainly that this is the primary novelty: even though he has not yet said the "May the words of my mouth be acceptable," nevertheless he may say supplications. And they derived this from the Gemara there, which said that this master after his prayer said thus, and that master said thus, see there. And what is the novelty, for anyone can arrange supplications for himself? Rather, this is what it comes to teach us: that this master after his prayer said thus before "May the words of my mouth be acceptable," and that master said thus before "May the words of my mouth be acceptable." And therefore to lengthen much is forbidden, because the "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" would become very distant from the eighteen blessings. However, a short prayer – is permitted. And therefore the author of the Gemara says that this master said this short prayer, and that master said that one. And therefore it is also permitted to say Kaddish and Kedushah.

The reason for the matter is that "May the words of my mouth be acceptable" is not similar to "O Lord, open my lips." For there, at the beginning of the prayer, when one says "and my mouth shall declare Your praise" – he is rightly obligated to say the praises our sages, of blessed memory, instituted. But at the conclusion of the prayer, where he only requests that what he prayed be accepted with favor – why should we care if he requests some further request? For even in the middle of the prayer, in the middle blessings, one may request what he needs, and how much more so at the end of the prayer? And it is clear that this is the opinion of the Tur and the Geonim. And they wrote that one must say after "My God, guard my tongue" – "Act for the sake of Your name, act for the sake of Your right hand, act for the sake of Your holiness, act for the sake of Your Torah." For it is brought in the Aggadah: Anyone who is accustomed to saying these things – merits and receives the Divine Presence. And we are accustomed to adding the verse "That Your beloved ones may be delivered, save with Your right hand and answer me." And further, we are accustomed to saying a verse that begins with the letter of his name and ends with the letter of his name. Nevertheless, one should not lengthen the supplications excessively.