Siman 232

Our teachers, the authors of the Tosafot, in Pesachim (107a) asked: Why is this prayer called "mincha"? For if it is because of the mincha of the tamid and the chavitin, were these minchot not also present in the tamid of the morning? And they answered: For we say in Berakhot (6b) that Elijah was only answered during the mincha prayer, and perhaps at the time of the offering of the mincha he was answered, and therefore it is called "the mincha prayer," for then was a time of favor. Thus far their words. And it is still not understood: why indeed was he answered at the time of the offering of the evening mincha, and why was it then a time of favor, for it is also so in the morning? And it seems to me that the matter is thus: for it is known that at the time of the offering of the mincha they would pour the wine libation and the Levites would sing with musical instruments, and this was both in the tamid of the morning and in the tamid of the afternoon. And you have no greater time of favor than this, except that the afternoon is more of a time of favor, because the mincha is at the end of all the services, as it is found in Yoma (34a), and it turns out that the afternoon mincha is the final service of the day, and is beloved and desired like the neilah prayer on Yom Kippur, and therefore then is the time of favor. And so David said: "Let my prayer be set forth as incense before You, the lifting up of my hands as the evening mincha," behold, the evening mincha is the more beloved. (And in the Yerushalmi chapter 4, halacha 1, it learns from this that mincha was compared to incense, see there; and the Magen Avraham brought in the name of the Yerushalmi that it was established at the time of the incense, and brought it from chapter 3, but it is not so, see there, and it can be settled. And the Abudraham explained that it is an expression of "menucha" [rest], for when the sun descends to the west it is as if going to its rest; however, according to this, we should have called it "manoach," and mincha is an expression of a gift. And perhaps according to the opinion of the Rambam that prayer is from the Torah and once a day, as I wrote in siman 89, if so, the morning is the payment of an obligation and mincha is a gift, and delve into this.)

It is stated in Berakhot (6b): "A person should always be careful regarding the mincha prayer, for Elijah was only answered during the mincha prayer, as it is said: 'And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the mincha, that Elijah the prophet came near.'" And the reason is: because the morning prayer has a known time, in the morning when he rises from his bed he prays immediately before he is preoccupied with his affairs, and likewise the evening prayer at night has a known time when he comes to his house and is free from his affairs. But the mincha prayer, which is in the middle of the day while he is preoccupied with his affairs, he must take it to heart and turn away from all his affairs and pray it, and if he has done so, his reward is very great. Therefore, the sages prevented every person from performing fixed labors close to the time of mincha, as we learned in a Mishnah: "A person should not sit before the barber close to mincha until he has prayed" (Tur). And similarly wrote the Rambam in chapter 6 of the laws of prayer, that what they forbade regarding getting a haircut and the other matters that will be explained—specifically close to mincha and not in the morning—is because they only decreed close to mincha, which is a common thing that most of the people engage in, but in the morning, which is an uncommon thing, they did not decree regarding it, see there. And there is mincha gedola and mincha ketana, and it will be explained in the next siman, and there it will be explained which is the primary one.

The Mincha prayer is like the Shacharit prayer, in that the congregation and the shaliach tzibbur pray in a whisper, and afterward the shaliach tzibbur repeats the prayer aloud, and the congregation answers "Amen" and Kedusha; such is the primary enactment, as I wrote in siman 124. Nevertheless, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote: That if the time is pressed they should pray in a whisper, and afterward the shaliach tzibbur shall say: "Magen" and "Mechayeh" and answer Kedusha and conclude "Ha-El HaKadosh," if there is no time remaining in the day to finish the eighteen blessings. Thus far his words. And why should they not all pray together, the congregation in a whisper and the shaliach tzibbur aloud? Because the mitzvah of prayer is in a whisper, and the shaliach tzibbur does not fulfill his obligation when he prays only aloud (Beit Yosef). And even though above in siman 124 he ruled regarding a shaliach tzibbur who enters the beit din and finds a congregation that has already prayed, that he begins immediately aloud and fulfills his obligation thereby, see there; that is because it is impossible in any other way due to the burden on the congregation, but whenever it is possible for him to pray in a whisper—it is much preferred (this is the intent of the Magen Avraham, subsection 1).

But our teacher, the Rema, wrote indeed so, and this is his wording: "And some say that the sheliach tzibbur prays with the congregation aloud, and so we practice." Thus far his words. And it appears his intention is that he says as follows: The congregation prays in a whisper and the sheliach tzibbur aloud, and when they reach 'Mechayeh HaMeitim' they say Kedushah, and the sheliach tzibbur says 'Nekadesh' or 'Nakdishach', and the congregation does not say this since they are standing in the midst of the prayer, but rather they answer 'Kadosh' and 'Baruch' and 'Yimloch'. But if so, why must the sheliach tzibbur pray aloud after 'HaEl HaKadosh', for it is impossible for the congregation to answer 'Amen' since they are standing in the midst of the prayer. And it must be said that indeed his intention is this: that he prays aloud until after Kedushah, and afterwards the sheliach tzibbur also prays in a whisper, and so it is implied from his words above in siman 124, see there, and his words here are somewhat obscure, as written there in section 7, see there. However, on a communal fast it is impossible to do so, for the sheliach tzibbur must say 'Aneinu' as a blessing in its own right between 'Goel' and 'Rofeh', and the congregation says it without a blessing in 'Shomea Tefillah', and of necessity even now one must do so: the sheliach tzibbur shall pray the entire Shemoneh Esrei aloud, and say 'Aneinu' between 'Goel' and 'Rofeh', and the congregation in a whisper and they shall say it in 'Shomea Tefillah', for there is no other way, and even though according to this they will not pray equally with the sheliach tzibbur (and this is the intention of the Magen Avraham, subsection 2).

And even though according to the approach of our teacher, the Rema, there will be no answering of "amen" at all in this prayer, and this is the reasoning of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, that according to his method the congregation would answer three "amens," nevertheless we are not concerned for it. For the obligation of "amen" is only when the shaliach tzibbur repeats the prayer aloud after previously praying in silence, and then without "amen" it would be a blessing in vain, as is written in siman 124. But according to the method of our teacher, the Rema, the shaliach tzibbur prays only one time, and there is no obligation in answering "amen" as is understood, and all this is according to the words of our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch.

But our custom is in a different manner, and it is the superior way, which is that if the time is pressed, the shaliach tzibbur stands and says half kaddish after 'Ashrei', and recites the first three blessings aloud and the congregation remains silent and answers these three amens and answers Kedushah, and after the shaliach tzibbur finishes 'ha-El ha-Kadosh', the congregation stands and prays in a whisper, and the shaliach tzibbur also prays in a whisper from 'Atah Chonen', and in this we have gained that in any event they answer 'amen' and also the shaliach tzibbur says most of his prayer in a whisper, and we have already written this in siman 124 (and so wrote the Ma'adanei Yom Tov). However, the Arizal, of blessed memory, was very particular and commanded that the congregation should pray in their usual manner with the shaliach tzibbur in a whisper, and afterward the shaliach tzibbur should pray aloud as in all prayers, even if it will be after sunset, and so we always practice.

However, this applies in a synagogue or a beit midrash where there are many people and it is certain that there will be ten who will answer 'amen,' but when praying in a house and there is a minimal minyan, or even slightly more and several are conversing during the repetition of the sheliach tzibbur and are not careful to answer 'amen,' then it is better to perform Kedushah as has been written. For if the sheliach tzibbur repeats the prayer there, certainly not everyone will answer 'amen,' and all the blessings will be in vain, and it would be a mitzvah performed through a transgression. Therefore, it is better to act as has been written, and such is the common custom and one should not deviate, unless in a place where they will ensure that everyone answers 'amen,' for then it is certainly better that there be a repetition of the sheliach tzibbur properly and according to the original enactment.

The sages taught in the Mishnah in the first chapter of Shabbat (9b): "A person should not sit before a barber near the time of Mincha until he prays, nor should a person enter a bathhouse, nor a tannery, nor to eat, nor to judge; but if they began—they do not interrupt." And the Gemara establishes that this "near Mincha" refers to Mincha Gedolah, which is a half hour after midday, and "near to it" is called a half hour before, which is from midday. And the Gemara asked: why is it forbidden, for there is still much time? And it answered that it is not dealing with an ordinary haircut, an ordinary bath, an ordinary tannery to inspect the skins, an ordinary meal, or the conclusion of a judgment, but rather it is dealing with a haircut like the haircut of a Kohen Gadol, where the tip of one hair was beside the root of the other and this requires many hours; and a bathhouse not merely to sweat, but to stay a long time to scrub, wash, sweat, and rinse; and a tannery also not merely to inspect, but a large tannery and the beginning of their processing and to inspect all the treatments of the skins; and to eat a large feast like a wedding feast or a brit milah and the like which last many hours; and to judge is dealing with the beginning of a judgment, and who knows how many hours it will continue; and therefore we fear that the time of Mincha will pass and they will not pray at all, and therefore they forbade beginning them.

And afterward there is an okimta in the Gemara, that it actually deals with a simple haircut, and a bathhouse merely for sweating, and a tannery merely for inspection, and a simple meal of any householder in his home, and for a legal case at the conclusion of the verdict; nevertheless, the sages forbade them even near mincha gedola by way of a decree: regarding a haircut, lest the shears break in the middle of the haircut and he will need to obtain another pair of scissors; and regarding a bathhouse, as we fear lest he faint due to the heat; and regarding a tannery, lest he see a loss in the hides and become preoccupied with this the entire day; and regarding eating, even a small meal, lest he come to extend it with meat and wine and tarry for several hours; and regarding a legal case, even at the conclusion of the verdict, we decree lest the judges see a reason to contradict what they had intended to rule and they will begin anew and it will be drawn out for many hours.

And if you should ask why the Gemara troubled itself with this, let us establish our Mishnah as being close to mincha ketana. The answer to this is because the Gemara previously says that if it is close to mincha ketana, why did we learn: "And if they began, they do not interrupt," for did Rava Yehoshua ben Levi not say that once the time for the prayer of mincha ketana has arrived, it is forbidden for a person to taste anything before he prays mincha, and all the more so that they must interrupt, for it is simple that tasting is lighter than interrupting and even so it is forbidden, and it is a kal vachomer for interrupting that he is certainly obligated to interrupt. And even though in Berakhot (28b) the Gemara rejected the words of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi and ruled that it is permitted to taste, nevertheless it holds that even if regarding tasting we do not follow his view, nevertheless regarding interrupting, certainly one must interrupt (Tosafot s.v. 'betisporet' at the end of the discussion, see there).

And behold, the Rif and the Rambam in the sixth chapter of the laws of prayer ruled entirely stringently and according to the second resolution, that even a small meal is forbidden near mincha gedola, and all matters such as a haircut, a tannery, a bathhouse, and the conclusion of a legal judgment are forbidden. Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, ruled accordingly in section 2, as is his way to rule like the Rif and the Rambam when their words are aligned. And according to this approach, we have not found our hands and feet in our generation and in previous generations, for the majority of our eating is after midday, and it appears explicitly that all of Israel did not accept upon themselves the stringency of this approach, and it is almost impossible to withstand it. Before us it will be explained that even according to this approach, there is some permission.

But our teachers the Tosafists, Rabbeinu Tam and the Ri, and the Rosh ruled according to the first resolution, that specifically a large feast, and the haircut of a Kohen Gadol, etc., a bathhouse, a large tannery, and the beginning of a legal case are forbidden close to Mincha Gedola; but a small meal, such as any individual with the members of his household, even on Shabbat and Yom Tov, is permitted close to Mincha Gedola, and similarly all of them are permitted in such a manner. But close to Mincha Ketana, which is from the beginning of the fourth hour—as Mincha Ketana is nine and a half, which is half of the fourth hour after midday—it is forbidden to begin any meal. And even with this we have not fulfilled our obligation, for many eat in the summer even after this time. And there is another system of the Ba'al HaMaor, and the Rashba and several of the Rishonim agreed to this, that even a large feast and such in other matters are permitted close to Mincha Gedola. And the reason is that since the Gemara did not establish it as referring to Mincha Ketana because of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, and since the halacha does not follow him, it is rejected, and we establish it as referring to close to Mincha Ketana, but close to Mincha Gedola everything is permitted. However, close to Mincha Ketana, even a small meal is forbidden. And there is another system, which the Rosh and the Tur cited in the name of the Ri, that a small meal is permitted ab initio close to Mincha Ketana, and similarly all of them in such a manner. And the reason for this system is that he holds that our Mishnah deals with a large feast and close to Mincha Gedola, according to the system of the Tosafot that we wrote, but it does not deal with a small meal at all. And since we do not hold according to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, it is permitted to begin a small meal even close to Mincha Ketana (Derisha).

The commentators (Bach and Magen Avraham, subsection 15) wrote that even according to this view, it is only permitted to begin close to mincha, but when the time of mincha ketana arrives—it is forbidden to begin; see there. And according to this, even according to this view we do not fulfill our obligation, for in the summer many and great people eat after the fourth and fifth hour as is known, and no one opens his mouth or chirps, and all these views our teacher, the Rema, brought in brief. However, there is another view in the Mordechai that there is no prohibition except for a large feast and close to mincha ketana, but a large feast before close to mincha ketana and a small meal even after the time of mincha ketana—is permitted ab initio; so they cited in the name of the Mordechai (Magen Avraham ibid.). And I did not find this in the Mordechai, and on the contrary, he wrote the opposite, and this is the wording of the Mordechai: "But a small meal is not forbidden to begin until the mincha ketana arrives, which is at the end of nine and a half hours." Thus far his words. Behold, explicitly, when the time of mincha ketana arrives it is forbidden to begin, and if so, how do we act? And it requires further study. And so too several things we do in the summer after the time of mincha ketana: the bathhouse, and haircutting, and the beginning of a legal case, and it is a daily occurrence in all the houses of beit din that they judge even the beginning of a legal case much after the time of mincha ketana.

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote regarding the words of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, who ruled like the Rif and the Rambam that even a small meal is forbidden and even near mincha gedola, he wrote and this is his wording: "And there are those who disagree and hold that a small meal is permitted, and it is only forbidden for a wedding feast or a circumcision. And some say that even a large meal near mincha gedola is permitted, and some say that a small meal even near mincha ktana is permitted. And the custom is to be lenient according to both views, that is, for a large meal near mincha gedola, and for a small meal near mincha ktana, and perhaps the reason is because now that they call to the synagogue we do not fear that perhaps he will be negligent and not pray. However, for a large meal one should be stringent even near mincha gedola etc." Thus far his words. And it must be understood, for if it is because of the permission of the calling to the synagogue, if so, why did he only permit near mincha ktana, for even after mincha ktana this permission exists. And it must be said that indeed his intention was so, but because in the aforementioned opinions only those who are lenient near mincha ktana were cited, but after the time of mincha ktana has arrived there is no lenient opinion as I have written, and regarding this he wrote that the custom is like the lenient ones among the opinions, and he wrote regarding this the reason for the permission because they call to the synagogue. But indeed, according to this permission it is permitted even afterwards, and as is the world's custom.

But in truth, this permission is not applicable now in most places, for they do not call out to the beit knesset at Mincha. And it appears in my humble opinion that the world relies on the Yerushalmi which says there regarding this Mishnah: "We learned 'near Mincha,' Rabbi Chiya learned: 'near darkness'… Rabbi Chananya said: Our Mishnah refers to common people, while that which Rabbi Chiya learned refers to colleagues. The Rabbis of Caesarea say: Our Mishnah follows Rabbi Yehuda (that the time of Mincha is until Plag HaMincha), while that which Rabbi Chiya learned follows the Rabbis (that the time of Mincha is until evening)." And according to this answer, there is no difficulty at all regarding our custom, for behold, we conduct ourselves like the Rabbis that the Mincha prayer is until evening, and therefore until near darkness it is permitted to eat, and likewise all labors such as the bathhouse, haircutting, the tannery, and judgment. And also from our Shas there is no contradiction to this, for we can say that the Gemara's discussion is according to Rabbi Yehuda, and why should we create a dispute between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi. And also according to the previous answer that our Mishnah is for common people and Rabbi Chiya's is for colleagues, meaning Torah scholars, it also works out well, for it is known that we do not consider ourselves common people as is explained in several places (and only according to this I do not understand how it applies to common people sitting in judgment, unless it refers to the litigants or to the courts in Syria as is stated at the beginning of the chapter "Zeh Boreir," see there. And also the first answer in the Yerushalmi, that "near Mincha" is the same as "near darkness," and also that "the tailor shall not go out near darkness" is also "near Mincha," see there, and this is certainly not the way of our Shas, and examine this closely).

And there are those who stated another permission regarding that which we eat after the time of mincha ketana, for just as was explained above in siman 89 regarding the matter of studying before the shacharit prayer, that if one prays in private it is forbidden to study, lest he come to be drawn away and the time of prayer will pass, but for one who is accustomed to pray in the beit knesset—it is permitted. And here too it is so, for that which they forbade in all these matters applies to one who prays mincha in private, but for one who prays with a minyan, surely when the minyan assembles, of necessity he will not forget to pray (see Magen Avraham subsection 8 in the name of the Mahariw). And certainly it is a great reasoning, and therefore one who does not pray mincha in public is certainly obligated to pray mincha before his eating at a time close to mincha ketana, and all the more so after this time, but one who prays in public can rely on the permissions we have written.

One must deliberate regarding the law of sleeping during the time of mincha ketana, for seemingly, since regarding Arvit they said at the beginning of Berakhot (4b): "A person should not come from the field in the evening and say... I will sleep a little," and this refers to the half-hour prior to the time of prayer as written in siman 235, and certainly once the time of mincha itself has arrived. Or perhaps it is possible to say that there, at night, which is a time of sleep, we fear lest he continue in his sleep the entire night as is the way of people, but during the day it is not the way to sleep much, and it is also possible to appoint someone to wake him from his sleep. And even though in such a case we say in Sukkah (26a): "Your guarantor needs a guarantor," that is regarding tefillin, where even a short time is considered fixed sleep due to the fear of passing wind, see there; but regarding mincha, where there is still much time, it is possible to say that it is permitted, unless it is close to the end of the time of mincha. And the world customarily treats this as permitted as well, and certainly it is proper that one who wishes to sleep after the time of mincha ketana should pray mincha beforehand.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 3: "And that which is forbidden to eat in a small meal is specifically when one establishes a meal, but to taste—that is, eating fruits—is permitted. And the same law applies to eating bread the size of an egg in the manner that a person eats without establishing a meal—it is permitted." Thus far his words. And behold, he wrote this according to the system of the Rif and the Rosh, and the same law applies according to all systems even regarding mincha ketana, for we do not hold like Rava Yehoshua ben Levi that even tasting is forbidden when the time for the mincha prayer arrives, and until one prays, tasting is permitted. And behold, he permitted bread the size of an egg, and it implies even bread that requires netilat yadayim, Hamotzi, and Birkat HaMazon. And it is a wondrous thing, for who will compel him not to eat more? And if his intention was for bread that does not require netilat yadayim and Hamotzi but rather mezonot, he should not have used the term "bread." And indeed, the Tur wrote only fruits, see there. And it must be said that our teacher, the Beit Yosef, maintains that it is only called a small meal with preparation, but without preparation it is considered casual eating and is permitted even with netilat yadayim, Hamotzi, and Birkat HaMazon, and more than an egg-bulk is considered establishing a meal (Magen Avraham, subsection 17). And similarly regarding drinking, more than an egg-bulk is forbidden, so that he does not become intoxicated (ibid.), and specifically with intoxicating beverages like wine and whiskey, but not beer and the like. And similarly fruits—it is permitted even a great deal, and similarly cakes whose blessing is 'mezonot' are permitted even more than an egg-bulk, for all these are called casual eating.

And regarding that which we learned in the Mishnah: "If they began, they do not interrupt," our teachers agreed that even if they began in a prohibited manner—for example, according to the Rif and the Rambam where they began after "near to Mincha Gedolah," and according to the Tosafot and the Rosh after "near to Mincha Ketanah"—nevertheless, they do not interrupt, and they shall complete the meal, or the haircut, the bathhouse, the tannery, and the legal case. And this is specifically when there will remain time to pray afterward; but if there will not remain time, even if they began in a permitted manner, they must interrupt. And even if the day is still long, as long as he knows that his meal will extend until night, he must interrupt (ibid. subsection 11).

But the Rosh and the Tur wrote that if they began close to mincha ketana they must interrupt, for that which was said: "if they began they do not interrupt" only applies to a large meal close to mincha gedola, but in a small meal close to mincha ketana—they are obligated to interrupt. However, from the wording of the Tosafot in Berakhot (28b, s.v. "keivan," see there) it is clear that one does not need to interrupt (Bach), and such is the opinion of several poskim (see Taz, subsection 3). And it is simple that in a place where there is a concern of drunkenness—it is obvious that one must interrupt, and therefore at large meals where people are accustomed to becoming drunk, they are obligated to interrupt and pray mincha (ibid., subsection 2). And this is what our teacher, the Rema, wrote at the end of section 2, and this is his wording: "However, at a large meal one should be stringent even close to mincha gedola, and even if he began before then, when mincha ketana arrives and the time is passing—he must stand and pray." Thus far his words. And certainly his intention is not that the time for mincha is literally passing, for if so, the phrasing "one should be stringent" would not belong, as according to the core law it is so; rather, his intention is that it could be so due to the abundance of drinks as is the way of large meals, and therefore even while the day is yet large one must interrupt (Magen Avraham, subsection 16 and Taz, subsection 4). Therefore, when there is a wedding on Shabbat and they have not eaten until after midday—they should pray mincha first and afterwards eat, for at a wedding it is certainly a large meal and it is forbidden to begin it close to mincha gedola. And even according to those who permit, in any case after midday, when the time of mincha gedola has arrived, it is certainly forbidden to eat until he prays, and similarly at a brit milah meal and the like (ibid.).

And since if they have begun they do not interrupt, it is necessary to know what is called a beginning. And thus our Sages, of blessed memory, said there: From when is the beginning of a haircut? From when he places the barbers' wrap upon his knees. And the beginning of a bath? From when he removes his outer garment. And the beginning of tanning? From when he ties a garment between his shoulders in the manner of the tanners. And the beginning of a legal case: If they were previously occupied with the case, it is a beginning from when the litigants begin to plead. And if they were not occupied with the case, it is a beginning from when the judges wrap themselves; and for us, who do not have wrapping, from when they sit with the intent to judge. And the beginning of eating is from when he washes his hands; and one who is accustomed to loosen his belt at the time of eating, from when he loosens his belt even before washing (Magen Avraham, subsection 12), for so it is explained in Shabbat there, see there. And even though this is not a burden at all, nevertheless they do not interrupt. And know that in the Yerushalmi we say regarding this of "if they have begun they do not interrupt," that if he interrupted he is called an ignoramus, for anyone who is exempt from a matter and performs it is called an ignoramus. And it is not similar to other stringencies, since it was taught explicitly: "they do not interrupt," he should not be stringent. And nevertheless, it appears to me that this is only when he began in a permitted manner, but if he began in a prohibited manner—he is permitted to interrupt since he began in a prohibited manner, and see what I wrote in Choshen Mishpat siman 5.