Commentary for Berakhot 57:31

ABAYE WOULD CURSE ANYONE WHO RECITED [THE PRAYER]: GRANT US UNDERSTANDING. After a lengthy discussion about the abridged version of sh’moneh esray, the Gemara informs us that Abaye condemned those who said this abridgement. Tosfos tell us that this is not an outright rejection of the haveenainu prayer. And this is the halochoh.¹Literally לן קיימא translates it is established to us. It is always used to express that this is the halochoh. And there are books of the Talmud that conclude, that these words have been said in a city but along the road, it is permitted to say Haveenainu, as it appears at the beginning of this Maseches. On 3a the Gemara relates the story of R’ Yosee who was criticized by Elijah for not saying the abridged version. It appears that when one has a legitimate difficulty with reciting the entire sh’moneh esray, he may recite the abridged version.²See Artscroll note 31. Also Shulchon Oruch 110, 1.

LET US INCLUDE [HAVDALA IN THE BLESSING]: GIVE US UNDERSTANDING. Rav Nachmon said in the name of Shmuel that one can always say haveenainu except at the conclusion of Shabos when one must say havdoloh. The Gemara here asks that he should include the havdoloh in the haveenainu prayer. When the Gemata asks a question it is proof that the Gemara feels that is quite logical to do as it suggests in the question. Otherwise the Gemara would not ask the question. Any question that the Gemara ever asks may be assumed to be a very strong statement that the Gemara considers the point made by the question to be very logical. In this particular case the Gemara does not in fact find an answer to the question. This is even further proof that the Gemara considers the point made by the question to be very logical. Tosfos is troubled by a Gemara in maseches Needoh that doesn’t seem to consider this question worthy of mentioning at all.
And that which the Gemara says in the first perek of needoh (8a) that all year long one prays the entire eighteen b’rochos with the exception of maariv at the conclusion of Yom Kipur, because it is taxing for the congregation because of the fast. And there are those who say that even at the conclusion of Yom Kipur we pray the complete eighteen b’rochos because we must say havdoloh in the b’rochoh of חונן הדעת. And this is bewildering. Why doesn’t the Gemara there ask that we should include havdoloh in the haveenainu prayer as the Gemara is so adamant here, that havdoloh could be included in haveenainu.
Here the Gemara seems to be so sure that it is a very reasonable solution to add havdoloh to haveenainu and there the Gemara doesn’t think of it at all. And we can answer: that there is no comparison. The Gemara here and the Gemara there are looking at the issue from two different vantage points. For there, the Gemara holds that throughout the entire year we always pray eighteen b’rochos, and we should therefore not ask “and we should include havdoloh in haveenainu” in order to change the tradition of the entire year. We usually make every effort to maintain the traditional practice.
But here in our Gemara, where we are saying that throughout the year we do pray haveenainu, the Gemara correctly asks why we should change the custom in order to say אתה חוננתנו, let us include havdoloh in haveenainu. Once again, the thrust of the Gemara’s question is that we should do what is necessary to maintain the tradition of saying haveenainu at the conclusion of Shabos as we do all year.

BECAUSE HE CAN RECITE IT IN [THE BLESSING]: WHO LISTENS TO PRAYER. The Gemara says that if one forgot to say “and give dew and rain” during the winter months, he need not repeat the sh’moneh esray because he can insert that prayer in the b’rochoh of שומע תפלה which is a general b’rochoh in which we can ask for any of our needs. As the Gemara says (later 31a, Avodoh Zoroh 8a) a person may ask for his needs during the b’rochoh שומע תפלה. And specifically one’s needs, for example when one has a sick person in his house or his field needs rain which is similar to a prayer and so to asking for dew and rain is a prayer that can be added to שומע תפלה, but declaring that He brings down the rain which is usually recited in the second b’rochoh and havdoloh and other praises of Hashem are not allowed to be said in this b’rochoh because they are not similar to the thought of the b’rochoh of שומע תפלה, which is to pray to Hashem for one’s needs not to declare the greatness of Hashem that he provides these needs on a regular basis.
The Gemara has taught us that שומע תפלה is a general b’rochoh in which one can mention his individual needs. It seems from Tosfos that there were those who thought that this could be taken a step further and when making personal requests from Hashem after the conclusion of the eighteen b’rochos, when we usually say אלקי נצור they would conclude with the words ברוך אתה ה' שומע תפלה.
Tosfos wants to show us that this is totally unacceptable. And it appears that one who says שומע תפלה ברוך אתה ה' after he concludes the words of request while sitting¹It is unclear why Tosfos uses the words “while sitting”. It would seem that this additional b’rocho would be added after the conclusion of personal request while still standing. Perhaps Tosfos means that even if one completed the sh’moneh esray and sat while asking these requests it is also unacceptable even if it does not appear as if he is adding to the sh’moneh esray. is repulsive, as the Gemara says (Megiloh18a) after the Gemara goes through a lengthy exposition explaining the reason for the order of all the b’rochos in sh’moneh esray, after this point, the recital of the final b’rochoh שים שלום, it is prohibited to recite the praises of Hashem, this means, to add b’rochos to these eighteen.
It is clear that it is prohibited to add a b’rochoh to the regular eighteen b’rochos. Tosfos expresses his opinion that even adding an entire sh’moneh esray is forbidden. And even if he comes to pray the entire sh’moneh esray another time and not to only recite one of the b’rochos such as שומע תפלה as we previously discussed, is forbidden, because it appears as if he is adding to the b’rochos of sh’moneh esray.
There is some evidence that addin a second sh’moneh esray is a worthy pursuit. Tosfos deals with that. And that which we said earlier (21a) would that a person pray the entire day, which seems to indicate that it is praiseworthy for one to say sh’moneh esray many times during the day, even more than the three prescribed times that is only when there is a doubt as to whether he prayed or not, he may pray a second time in order to dispel the doubt for even if he prayed already praying again is worthy, but if he definitely prayed, we have said earlier that he must stop even in the middle of a b’rochoh as Shmuel says in perek Mee Shemaiso (ibid.)
But we do find that a person is required to recite the sh’moneh esray twice. And that which we find that the Chazon repeats them, the eighteen b’rochos, that is so that the multitude who cannot say the sh’moneh esray themselves, should fulfill their obligation by listening to the Chazon.
But why must the Chazon first say the sh’moneh esray himself? Why can’t he fulfill his own obligation as he recites it for the congregation? And the reason that the Chazon prays silently together with the congregation, before he recites the sh’moneh esray publicly, that private recital, is in order to put his prayer in order, so that he should be familiar with the text of the prayer when he recites it for the public, as the Gemara says in the last perek of Rosh Hashonoh (34b).

Trying to recall the words.

From his office as Precentor.

Before becoming righteous. It is possible for such an one to lapse into evil ways.

Abot ii. 5 ; Singer, p. 187.

There is confusion between Johanan, i.e. John Hyrcanus, and Jannaeus (=Jonathan, see Derenbourg, op. cit. p. 95 n.), i.e. Alexander Jannaeus. The former was at first favourably disposed towards the Pharisees, but in the latter part of his life opposed them (Schurer, i.i. pp. 288f.) ; but the latter was throughout his reign hostile to them and massacred numbers of them ; ibid. pp. 300 ff.

In holding that Johanan and Jannaeus were identical, he assumes that he had been originally wicked and that accounts for his later lapse.

If Johanan was originally righteous, how could he have become a Sadducee ?

The benediction relating to Minim. He broke down in the middle ; consequently there was no suspicion that his heretical views made him hesitate to pronounce the words.

About discharging the Precentor.

See Singer, pp. 136-142.

Ibid. pp. 239-242.

M.: Raba.

Either Carthage or Carthagene in Spain, where there was a Jewish Community in the 2nd cent. See Neubauer, p. 411. Krauss, p. 572, identifies it with Carthage. Bacher, A. P. A. II. p. 218 n. 6, p. 225 n. 1, denies the existence of an Amora of this name and suggests as the true reading : R. Abba of Carthage said in the name of R. Isaac.

The additional six benedictions to the eighteen are enumerated in Mishnah Ta'anit ii. 3 f. The only addition now made to the Tefillah on a fast day is the paragraph in Singer, p. 50, which is quoted from J. T.

Words for prayer and supplication.

Since it was on no special day of the Calendar that this happened.

See Singer, p. 55. What follows is a summary of the central benedictions of the Tefillah, ibid. pp. 46-50.

And not the eighteen benedictions in full.

See Singer, p. 46.

M. : Raba b. Ishmael.

And the abstract of the remainder.

See Singer, p. 51, "We give thanks." This benediction and what follows are said in full even when the central benedictions are shortened.

Viz. the three introductory and three concluding benedictions and "Give us understanding."

See Singer, p. 47.

Ibid. p. 49, "Hear our voice."

Ibid. p. 44 bot.

Ibid. p. 216.

Who repeats the whole Tefillah aloud after it has been said silently by the Congregation.

He thereupon includes it in this benediction.