Siman 55

The Kaddish is a great and awesome praise that the Men of the Great Assembly instituted after the destruction of the First Temple. It is a prayer regarding the desecration of His Name, may He be blessed, from the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, the destruction of the Holy Land, and the dispersion of Israel to the four corners of the earth. We pray that His Name, may He be blessed, shall be magnified and sanctified, as the prophet said: "And I will be magnified, and I will be sanctified, and I will make Myself known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I am the Lord." R. Yossi said at the beginning of Berakhot that one time he heard a heavenly voice cooing like a dove and saying: "Woe to the children, for due to whose sins I destroyed My house, and burned My sanctuary, and exiled them..." And Elijah the prophet said to him that three times a day such a heavenly voice goes forth. And not only that, but at the time when Israel enters the synagogues and the study halls, and answers "Amen! May His great Name..." – the Holy One, blessed be He, nods His head and says: "Praiseworthy is the King who is thus praised in His house. What is there for the Father who exiled His children, and woe to the children who were exiled from their Father's table." And because of its great excellence, they instituted it in the Aramaic language, because in Babylon they spoke in this language. Therefore, so that everyone would understand – they instituted it in the spoken language. And there are further hidden reasons for this.

And our sages, of blessed memory, said in Shabbat (119b): Anyone who responds "Amen! Yehei shemei rabba" with all his strength—they tear up his sentence, and they open for him the gates of Gan Eden. And in the Pesikta, in the story of Rabbi Ishmael ben Elisha, it says: When Israel enters the synagogues and says "Yehei shemei rabba mevorach" in a loud voice—they nullify harsh decrees (in Tosafot ibid.). And at the end of Sotah it is brought that "Amen! Yehei shemei rabba" is one of the pillars of the world, see there. Therefore, one must be very careful in this, to respond with intention and in a loud voice.

There are some among the masses of the children of Israel who believe that it is a mitzvah to increase the number of Kaddishim. How mistaken they are! And I apply to them the verse, "the hallowed stones are poured out...". One does not use the scepter of the King of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, except as He has permitted us, and one who increases them treats the holy splendor with contempt. One of the great poskim has already written in this siman that just as it is good to minimize blessings, so too it is good to minimize Kaddishim (Knesset HaGedolah). And one unique individual among the great Chassidim cried out bitterly over this (the Chassid, Devar Shmuel, in a responsum, siman 183, cited in the Ba'er Heitev, subsection 1). This is his wording: Those who increase the recitation of Kaddishim... and weaken the power of the holiness of the great and awesome Name of Hashem... Thus far his words. Therefore, we shall explain how many Kaddishim are to be said in the prayers. The explanation of Kaddish will be explained in siman 56 with the help of Heaven.

The early authorities said only seven kaddishim throughout the day: three in Shacharit: one after "Yishtabach," the second after Tachanun, and the third after "Uva LeTziyon Goel." And two in Mincha: one after "Ashrei," and the second after Tachanun. And two in Arvit: one before Shemoneh Esreh, and the second after Shemoneh Esreh. This is based on "Seven times a day I praise You" (Rokeach). And afterwards they added three more, namely in every prayer after "Aleinu." And they wrote that every man must fulfill every day the letters of Tzadik, which is ninety amens: four Kedushot, ten kaddishim, one hundred Berakhot (Magen Avraham siman ?). And they instituted a kaddish after "Aleinu" for the sake of the orphans who are unable to pray before the amud, and they called this "Kaddish Yatom." And on a day of the reading of the Torah, another kaddish after the reading of the Torah. And beyond this there is no place for kaddishim. And despite all this, they added one more after the Shir Shel Yom because of the many orphans, but more than this, Heaven forbid to add. And with this they fulfill the banner of the holy Shekhinah. And Heaven forbid to say the kaddish in haste and hurry, for this is the way of the ignorant. Rather, they should say it with intention and contemplation, and to feel pain over the exile of the holy Shekhinah.

The Rambam wrote in the Order of Prayer regarding the text of the Kaddish: Any ten of Israel or more, who engage in the study of the Oral Torah, and even in Midrashim or Aggadot, when they conclude, one of them says Kaddish in this version… and it is called Kaddish deRabbanan. Thus far his words. It is clear from his words that specifically ten who study together have permission to say this Kaddish, to the exclusion of if fewer than ten study, and certainly when one studies alone. According to this, one must rebuke people when they have a Yahrzeit, who study some chapters of Mishnayot by themselves and say Kaddish. It is forbidden to do so. There are those who wrote that Kaddish should not be said except over words of Aggada, and therefore it is customary to say some Aggadic passage after the study in order to say Kaddish deRabbanan (Magen Avraham siman 54, subsection 3). And although from the words of the Rambam in the Commentary on the Mishnah at the end of Avot it also appears so, see there, nevertheless from his words that we brought explicitly it does not appear so. On the contrary, regarding Aggadot he wrote "even," meaning: and it is not necessary to state regarding Halakhot. See in section 9.

Any matter of sanctity is impossible with fewer than ten from Israel: males, and adults who have brought two hairs, and free men to the exclusion of slaves. Therefore, for kaddish and for kedushah and for barechu when there are not ten—they shall not say them, for the Shekhinah dwells upon ten. And in the Gemara they learned this from a verse in Berakhot (21b), from "And I shall be sanctified in the midst of the children of Israel," see there. Nevertheless, if they began to say kaddish or kedushah with ten, and some of them left in the middle—they complete that kaddish or kedushah which he began. And this is provided that six remained, who are a majority of the ten. Our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 2 that nevertheless it is a transgression to leave, and regarding them it is said: "And those who forsake the Lord shall perish." But if ten remained—it is permitted to leave. Thus far his words. That is to say: that if ten remained—it is permitted to leave when he is forced to leave, such as for his needs and the like. For without this, it is simple that even when ten remain it is forbidden to leave. Rather, when ten do not remain, in any case it is forbidden to leave (so it appears according to my humble opinion).

It is a great principle in this law: when there were ten, and some of them left in the middle, they complete that matter with the kaddish belonging to it and no more. For example, if some of them left in the middle of Pesukei D'Zimrah—they complete until "Yishtabach" and he says kaddish, and no more because "Yotzer Or" is a different matter. If some of them left during "Yotzer Or"—they complete until the Shemoneh Esreh and no more. If some of them left before the sheliach tzibbur began the repetition—the sheliach tzibbur shall not repeat the prayer. If some of them left after he began the repetition of the sheliach tzibbur—they complete the Kedushah and the entire repetition of the sheliach tzibbur with the kaddish after the Shemoneh Esreh, but "Ashrei"-"Uva LeTziyon"—each one shall say it by himself. If some of them left after they began "Ashrei"-"Uva LeTziyon"—he says Kaddish Shalem. However, regarding "Aleinu," even if some of them left after they began "Aleinu"—they shall not say the kaddish after Aleinu, since it is nothing more than a custom. And such is the law for Mincha and Ma'ariv. And Hallel and Musaf and the reading of the Torah is a matter unto itself. (Our teacher, the Rema, in section 3 wrote: And if they left after he began aloud... they may complete... and say the Kaddish Shalem... Thus far his words. And it is puzzling, for behold Kaddish Shalem is after "Uva LeTziyon." And the Pri Chadash and the Knesset HaGedolah challenged this. And it seems to me that his intention was for the Chatzi Kaddish after the Shemoneh Esreh, but regardless he shall say it complete since the Kaddish Shalem will not be said again, is it not better that he conclude with "Titkabel" in this kaddish? And be precise and you will find it easy.)

And it appears to me that such is the law regarding the reading of the Torah, that if some of them left—they should complete the obligation of the day with those called to the Torah. But the maftir shall not recite the blessings, as the haftarah is a different matter. And consequently, he shall also not recite the blessings for the Torah. However, at mincha on a public fast day, the maftir shall ascend as he is the third of those called to the Torah, because he is of the count of those called. But for the haftarah and its blessings they shall not recite the blessings, as it is a matter unto itself (so it appears according to my humble opinion). And see in the Magen Avraham at the beginning of siman 143. And it requires further study, and see the Eliyah Rabbah there.

And just as when some of them left they complete the prayer with the kaddish belonging to it, so too if they began without ten and in the middle they reached ten, such as if they began "Baruch She'amar" without ten and at "Yishtabach" ten arrived – they say kaddish as I wrote in siman 53, and similarly in Arvit. And there is one who learned from this also regarding study: that when they began to study without ten and in the middle ten arrived, he should say kaddish (Taz, subsection 3). Behold, if they studied some together – certainly it is so. But if they arrived after they studied – they shall not say kaddish (Magen Avraham, siman 69, subsection 4). And there is one from whose words it appears that even in such a case he says kaddish (Taz, ibid.), but it is not so. And it is not similar to "Yishtabach," for there the essence of the prayer was so ordained that they should pray with ten and say kaddish, but not with study. And similarly, there is one who wished to say that when there were ten in the beit knesset, even if they did not all study, he says kaddish (ibid. in the name of L"ch and so it is implied from the Taz). And from the words of the Rambam explicitly it does not appear so, for even though we perform Kedushah even for an individual, as I wrote in siman 69 – this is because every individual is obligated in this every day, as this is of the essence of the ordinance of prayer. This is not the case with kaddish over study, which is not an obligation; rather, if ten study together, the sages permitted saying kaddish d'rabbanan and not in any other manner, and as I wrote in section 5 in the name of the Rambam.

Our teachers, the authors of the Shulchan Aruch, wrote in section 4: There are those who permit saying a devar shebikdusha with nine and the addition of a minor older than six who knows to Whom we pray. But their words did not seem correct to the great poskim. And the same law applies to a slave and a woman, that they do not join. And even by means of a Chumash in his hand – one may not join him. However, there are those who are accustomed to be lenient in a time of pressing need. Thus far his words. And behold, regarding this law it is a dispute of the authorities, as there are those who wished to permit joining him to ten. Nevertheless, even those who permit did not find it necessary to act so in practice (Tosafot Berakhot 48a, starting with the words "Veleit," wrote this regarding our teacher Tam, see there). And also the opinion of the Rambam in the eighth chapter of Berakhot is so, see there. This is the wording of our teachers, the authors of the Tosafot, there: The conclusion of the matter: we do not make a minor an addition to ten for zimun or for prayer until he brings two hairs. Thus far their words, and so wrote the Rosh, and so it is in the Yerushalmi there, and so it is in Midrash Rabbah "Bereishit" (parashah 91, see there). And that which they wrote that "there are those who are lenient in a time of pressing need," the Levush wrote that he did not see people accustomed to be lenient even in a time of pressing need. And so we rule the halacha in practice. (See Magen Avraham subsection 5. And the Eliyah Rabbah and Shevut Yaakov already disagreed with him, as wrote the Machatzit HaShekel.)

A minor who has reached the age of thirteen years and one day—we include him for all matters. And we say that presumably he has produced hairs, for regarding rabbinic matters we apply this presumption, but not regarding Torah matters, as is explained in several places. However, if we know that he has not produced hairs—we do not include him until he produces hairs. But if he is a saris, in whom the signs of a saris have appeared, when he is twenty years old he then becomes like an adult. And if the signs of a saris have not appeared in him—until the majority of his years have passed, which is to say when he is thirty-six years old he becomes like an adult, and not before. (In the Shulchan Aruch, section 5, he wrote: And if signs of a saris appeared in him before then—his law is like an adult. Thus far his words. And I wonder: why did he not mention twenty years? For so it is explicitly stated in Yevamot (80a) and in Niddah (47a). And so wrote the Rambam in the second chapter of Ishut, and the Tur and Shulchan Aruch Even HaEzer siman 155.)

A shoteh certainly does not join. And similarly, the cheresh who does not hear and does not speak—he is like a shoteh. But when he speaks and does not hear, or hears and does not speak—his law is like a sighted person in every matter and he joins. And one should not ask: since he does not hear what the sheliach tzibbur says, or does not speak himself, how can he join for the saying of Kaddish and Kedushah? For this is no question at all, as it does not hinder that they do not all answer and hear, as will be explained that one who is sleeping joins the minyan. And similarly, one who stands in the middle of the prayer joins, even though he cannot interrupt and answer. And the reason is that we require ten, for wherever there are ten—the Shekhinah dwells. And when the Shekhinah is here, they can say any d'var shebikdushah, even though not everyone answers.

This is the wording of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, in section 6: And if one of the ten began to pray alone and is unable to answer with them, or if he is sleeping—even so, he joins with them. Thus far his words, and the reason is as we have explained. And there is one who disagrees regarding this case of a sleeper, and holds that he does not join. And it is not similar to one standing in prayer, for he is able to remain silent and hear the Kaddish and the Kedushah, which is not the case with a sleeper (Taz subsection 4). Furthermore: one standing in prayer is occupied with the needs of Heaven, but a sleeper for the time being is like a mere corpse, and therefore we bless "Who restores souls to dead bodies," and how could he join? Nevertheless, there are those who uphold his words (Magen Avraham subsection 8, and Eliyah Rabbah subsection 7). However, they should not join more than one (Magen Avraham ibid.). But those standing in prayer—they may join up to four. However, regarding a sleeper, certainly ab initio one should wake him. And also regarding one who is still standing in prayer, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 7, and this is his wording: When one prays alone—it is proper that the others wait to say Kaddish until he finishes, so that he too may merit. Thus far his words. But if he prolongs it greatly—they should not wait for him. And a sick person when he is conscious—they join him if he is lying in the room of those praying. And if he is not conscious, it seems to me that they do not join him. And even according to the one who holds that a sleeper joins—it is not similar to a sick person, for a sleeper can be awakened, which is not the case with a sick person. (And there is a proof for this from Gittin 70b, see there. Examine it and you will find it simple.)

He is always called a "katan" until he is thirteen years and one day old. And it is not specifically one day; even one hour after thirteen—he becomes a gadol. And provided that he brings two hairs, and we assume that he has brought hairs as I wrote in section 11. And a leap year—his year is considered thirteen months. Therefore, one who was born in Adar, and becomes bar mitzvah in Adar in the thirteenth year, and it was then a leap year—he does not become bar mitzvah until the second Adar. For even though we hold that an unspecified Adar is the first, this is regarding one who vows "until Adar" and the like. But in the count of years—it is not completed in a leap year until thirteen months. Nevertheless, if he was born in a leap year in the first Adar, and the thirteenth year was also a leap year—he becomes bar mitzvah in the first Adar. Thus agreed most of the poskim (Eliyah Rabbah subsection 9, and the Peri Chadash and the Responsa of the Mahari Mintz siman 9, and Shevut Yaakov siman 9, and the Gaon Rabbi David Oppenheim). And although there are those who disagree on this (Magen Avraham subsection 10 and Olat Tamid), nevertheless, the primary ruling is like the majority of the poskim. And so ruled the Levush later in siman 685 (and so it is explained from the words of the Shulchan Aruch section 10).

Sometimes two children who were born, one earlier and one later, and the one who was born later becomes bar mitzvah earlier. For example, when one youth was born in a leap year on the twenty-ninth of Adar Rishon, and the second was born at the beginning of Adar Sheni, and the thirteenth year is not a leap year; for if it were a leap year, the first would have become bar mitzvah on the twenty-ninth of the first as I wrote in the previous section. But when the year is a simple year—this one who was born at the beginning of Adar Sheni becomes bar mitzvah at the beginning of Adar, and this one who was born on the twenty-ninth of the first becomes bar mitzvah on the twenty-ninth of it. And one who was born on Rosh Chodesh becomes bar mitzvah on Rosh Chodesh. And there is no difference whether the Rosh Chodesh was the same at his birth and at the bar mitzvah, or whether it was not the same, such as when then the first day was Rosh Chodesh and now it is two days; or the opposite, such as Kislev and Tevet which are sometimes one day and sometimes two days. And thus the great ones agreed (Magen Avraham there, and Sha'arei Teshuva subsection 13 in the name of the Responsa of the Bach).

A transgressor regarding the entire Torah does not join the quorum of ten. However, a transgressor regarding one transgression, or one who transgressed a decree of the community, we do join him. However, if they placed him under a ban, according to what is explained in Yoreh Deah siman 334, we do not join him, for it has already been explained there that one who is distanced is not joined for any matter that requires ten. Nevertheless, it is permitted to pray in a synagogue where he is present. And one does not need to distance himself from him unless they explicitly acted stringently toward him in this manner, as has been explained there.

That which we say in Pesachim (85b) that even an iron partition does not intervene between Israel and their Father in Heaven, this is its explanation: that one who passes in the street next to a synagogue, and hears the congregation saying Kaddish or Kedushah and "Barchu" – he must answer with them, if there is no interruption of a filthy thing between them or idol worship. However, this is all when there are ten in one place, meaning in one room. But to join ten from two places – they do not join. And it is necessary to say so, for "upon every ten the Shekhinah rests," and this is only relevant when they are gathered in one place. For if not so, there are always ten in a city, and what does it matter to me if they are in two places or ten places? Rather, for the joining of the ten – they must all be in one room. And also the shaliach tzibbur must be with them in one room, and there are detailed laws in this as will be explained with the help of Heaven.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 13: One who stands within the doorway from the doorstop and outward—that is, from the place where the inner edge of the door's thickness closes and outward—is as if he is outside. Thus far his words. That is to say: the area of the lintel until the inner edge of the door is as if it is inside, since it is always outside the door. But that piece of the lintel that the door blocks is always as if it is outside, even at the time when the door is open. However, regarding Shabbat in the passage concerning the threshold (9a), we say: An open doorway is as if it is inside. And in truth, there are those who disagree on this, and also the opinion of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, himself in his great work is so. But he found that the Ri"v did not write so, and therefore he ruled stringently. However, the later authorities brought that the great poskim disagree on this (Magen Avraham subsection 11 and Eliyah Rabbah). Therefore, one may be lenient in this if it is necessary for the sake of the people standing under the lintel when the door is open.

Roofs and upper stories are not included in the category of a house, and one standing upon them does not join the count with those who are in the house. The Tur and the Shulchan Aruch in section 15 ruled that if some of them are outside and some of them are inside, and the shaliach tzibbur is within the doorway—he joins them together. Thus far their words. Just as with Birkat HaMazon further on in siman 195, for the shaliach tzibbur joins them together as if they are all in one room, even if they do not see one another, for both sides are drawn after the shaliach tzibbur.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 14: One who stands behind the beit knesset, and between them is a window even many stories high, even if it is not four wide, and he shows them his face from there – he joins with them for a minyan. Thus far his words. He brought this in his great book in the name of a Gaon, see there. And he holds that the seeing of the face in this matter is like the entire body. And it is possible that since the Shekhinah rests upon any ten, and the primary resting of the Shekhinah is upon the face, as it is written: "for the skin of his face shone." And there is one who wrote that even though upper stories do not join with those standing in the house, nevertheless, if the upper stories are not made of complete partitions but rather of poles, in a manner that those below see those above, and it is difficult for them to go down – they join with one another. And there are those who hesitate regarding this (see Eliyah Rabbah subsection 12, and Sha'arei Teshuvah subsection 15). And perhaps in a time of pressing need one may rely on this and permit it. However, it is certain that those standing in the women's gallery do not join with those standing in the beit knesset, even though there are windows from the women's gallery to the beit knesset, and these see the faces of those, since they are complete partitions – they are two separate domains. And it is not similar to one standing behind the beit knesset who joins by seeing the face, for there he is not standing in a house of his own but rather in a courtyard or in the street, and therefore we consider him as if he is standing in the beit knesset. But this is not so for one standing in a house of his own. (So it appears in my humble opinion. And also regarding one standing behind the beit knesset – only one joins and no more, for so implies the wording of the Shulchan Aruch, and let us not add to it. So it appears in my humble opinion regarding these laws.)

We say in Eruvin (92a) that a small courtyard that was breached into a large one—meaning that the wall of the small one was breached in its entirety into the large one, and no side-posts remained for the small one, but for the large one side-posts remained, and one standing in the small one sees them as if they are one courtyard—these two courtyards exist such that the residents of the large one are in the small one, but the residents of the small one are not in the large one. That is to say: the residents of the large one rule over the small one, and pull it toward them as if they are one courtyard. But the small one does not pull the large one after it. And the reason: since from one side they appear as one, and from one side they appear as two—the small one is nullified to the large one regarding all laws in the Torah, as is explained there.

Therefore, also regarding the matter of joining ten, the law is so. That is, if the congregation is in the large area and the shaliach tzibbur is in the small area—they join together and fulfill their obligation, for we view it as if the shaliach tzibbur is also in the large area. But if the congregation is in the small area and the shaliach tzibbur is in the large area—they do not fulfill their obligation, for the congregation cannot pull the shaliach tzibbur after them since the shaliach tzibbur is in the large area. And the shaliach tzibbur cannot pull the congregation, because the congregation is not pulled after the individual as the individual is pulled after the congregation. And all the more so if nine are in the large area and one is in the small area—they join, but if an individual is in the large area and nine are in the small area—they do not join, for the reason that has been explained. And it seems to me that they mentioned an individual in the small area incidentally to the law of the shaliach tzibbur, and the same law applies to more than an individual up to four. For if four are in the small area and six are in the large area—they join. And conversely they do not join, for the majority is not drawn after the minority. And so too half and half—they do not join. And if the shaliach tzibbur or the individuals are on the threshold of the large area and the majority is in the small area—they join (Perishah and Eliyah Rabbah).

But if the smaller one was not breached in its entirety into the larger one—they do not combine with one another at all. Therefore, they do not combine for a minyan from two rooms. And in the beit knesset, everyone must be in the beit knesset, and if one stands in the courtyard, meaning in the entrance hall or in a room adjacent to the beit knesset, even if there is a doorway from the room to the beit knesset—they do not combine. And it has already been explained that all this is regarding combining. But when there is a minyan in one place—those standing in other places may answer "Amen," and Kaddish, and Kedushah, and "Barchu." And if they pray with them—they are considered as those who pray with the tzibbur.

The bima, even though it is ten high and four wide, and has partitions and constitutes a domain unto itself, nevertheless regarding the joining for a minyan of ten, since it is an accessory of the beit knesset—one who stands there joins for the ten, for regarding this matter it is truly one place with the beit knesset. And it appears to me that even nine on the bima and one in the beit knesset join together. And it is not similar to a large and small room, as has been explained, for the bima and the beit knesset are considered as truly one regarding the matter of joining. And even though regarding standing before a Sefer Torah it is considered as another domain, as I wrote in Yoreh Deah siman 242—it is not similar, for there the standing is due to the honor of the Sefer Torah, and when a division of domain is recognizable, the reason of honor is removed. But for joining, they are one. Nevertheless, there is one who says that if the partitions reach the ceiling, it constitutes a domain unto itself. And one should be concerned for this opinion. However, this is not common at all, and even if on one side or on two sides they reach the ceiling, since on two sides they do not reach, they are as one.

A city that has only ten men and one of them wants to leave during the entire year – they cannot protest against him. However, during the Yamim Noraim they can protest against him, so that he does not leave or that he appoints another in his place. But when there are ten without him – they cannot protest against him. And even though they could say that perhaps one of them will leave for his needs, or perhaps he will fall ill and a minyan will not remain, for if so, there is no end to the matter (see Taz). And if they are eleven men, and two want to leave – both of them hire one in their place to complete the minyan. And they pay half according to wealth and half according to souls. And there is one who says that in this case the payment is only according to souls, for behold, each one is obligated to appoint a man in his place. And only when there are eight and they need to hire two for a minyan – in that case the eight pay half according to wealth and half according to souls, because the poor can say that from our perspective we can go to pray in another place, and it is not so for the wealthy who are afraid to leave their property – they must pay more. But when two travel from here – the poor man is equal with the wealthy man (Magen Avraham subsection 16). And these who are leaving from here must pay their portion also for the hiring of the chazzan. And there is no difference between whether they want to go from here before the Yamim Noraim or a long time beforehand, for as long as he will not return for the Yamim Noraim – he is obligated to appoint a man in his place, and to bear the burden with those who remain. And one who is forced to flee – is entirely exempt when he is not negligent himself in his fleeing. (See Magen Avraham subsection 16, and Eliyah Rabbah subsection 20, that it is called "negligence" when he injured his fellow or damaged his property, see there. And be precise and you will find it simple.)

One does not compel hiring to complete a minyan except during the Days of Awe, and such as when they are missing only one or two. Unless there is a fixed and publicized custom in the city to compel hiring even with a deficiency of three or four or more, according to the custom. And when there is a minyan in the city, but none of them is able to be the sheliach tzibbur – they compel one another to hire a chazzan. And so too in a place where there is not always a minyan in the beit knesset, because they do not all come to pray – they can compel one another with fines so that a minyan will always come to the beit knesset so that the tamid will not be nullified. However, if there is another beit knesset in the city – they cannot compel coming specifically to this beit knesset. And the Maharil responded regarding the settlements that need to hire a minyan and a chazzan, and there are surroundings there that are accustomed to coming to these settlements to pray, nevertheless the settlements cannot compel the people of the surroundings to bear the burden with them, because they can say "we are able to travel to another place" (Magen Avraham subsection 17). And nevertheless, it seems to me that this is not a general rule, and everything is according to the matter. And with us, the simple custom is that all the people of the surroundings bear the burden of the expense.