Q & A: Selichot Restrictions (Conclusion)

Question: The Kitzur Shulchan Aruch states that an individual praying without a minyan is not allowed to recite the Thirteen Middot in Selichot. Additionally, the Selichot prayers that were composed in Aramaic may only be recited with a minyan as well. What is the reason for these restrictions?

Moshe Jakobowitz

Brooklyn, NY

Synopsis: First, we discussed the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch’s requirement for a minyan when reciting the Thirteen Middot as a prayer or supplication (Topic 128:9 Hilchot Chodesh Elul). The Beit Yosef on the Tur (Orach Chayyim 565) explains that the Thirteen Middot is a communal prayer and thus is a davar she’b’kedusha, a matter involving great holiness. The Mishna in Tractate Megillah (23b) enumerates the situations that incorporate davar she’b’kedusha, and thus require a minyan, including communal prayer.

After discussing whether it is permitted to pray for the sick in Aramaic, we pointed out that there is a difference between individual prayer (tefillat yachid) and congregational prayer (tefillat hatzibbur), for the latter is assured of acceptance by G-d.

Last week, we cited Shiltei HaGibborim (to Rif, beginning of Tractate Berachot, Chapter 2) who permits one who does not know Hebrew to pray in another language. This might even include Aramaic, especially as that was the spoken language of our people in earlier times. Chochmat Shlomo was very critical of Tur and Mechaber allowing prayer in any language, but only with regard to our formally structured tefillah, not personal supplications.

* * * * *

Answer: To explain the aversion the angels are said to have to the Aramaic language in particular, we turn to the statement of Rabbi Yehuda in the name of Rav (Sanhedrin 38b): “The first man, Adam, spoke in Aramaic, for it is written (Psalms 139:17), ‘Ve’li mah yakru re’echa, Kel’” – How valued (or weighty) are your thoughts of me, G-d.

To explain this statement, the Maharsha ad loc. quotes Rabbi Yochanan’s statement in Bava Batra (75b): In time to come, the righteous will be called by the name of G-d, for it is written (Isaiah 43:7), “Everyone that is called by My name, whom I have created for My glory, I have created them and fashioned them.” The Maharsha asks: Where in that pasuk are the “righteous” and the “time to come” mentioned? He explains that honor is attained only through the Torah. Indeed, the Gemara (Sanhedrin loc. cit.) continues its comments about Adam, stating that G-d showed him every generation to come and its scholars, every generation and its sages. When it came to the generation of Rabbi Akiva, Adam rejoiced at Rabbi Akiva’s learning but was grieved at his death [Rabbi Akiva died a martyr’s death at the hands of the Romans]. That is when Adam exclaimed, “Ve’li mah yakru re’echa, Kel.”

“Mah yakru” is the Aramaic equivalent of “mah kavdu”– how valued. Adam did not want the angels to understand what he was saying to G-d because they would be jealous of him. Not only had G-d created man, but He also intended to give the Torah to human beings. The angels therefore have an aversion to the language Adam used to affirm our right to the Torah, which they would have liked to possess themselves. Thus, it is specifically in Aramaic that we are not permitted to pray.

Yet it is precisely from this Gemara that we can bring yet another proof to the efficacy of tefillat hatzibbur. It is obvious that notwithstanding any restrictions on praying in Aramaic, when a tzibbur – that is, the minimum quorum of ten Jews – offers up its prayers as one, it can do so even in Aramaic. This should surely portend well for prayers in other languages.

However, the saintly Chofetz Chaim, in line with the previously cited Chochmat Shlomo, comes out very strongly in his Mishna Berurato the Shulchan Aruch (loc. cit.) against those who would alter the language of our prayers from Hebrew to another language. He underscores that our tefillot are ancient, instituted by our Sages in Hebrew, also called Lashon haKodesh, the holy language. [Obviously, those age-old prayers and piyutim that our Sages instituted in Aramaic would qualify as an acceptable exception and not subject to the Chofetz Chaim’s admonition.] Also, he is contemptuous of those who remove any reference to Jerusalem and the ingathering of the exiles from their congregational prayers. He concludes that it was precisely because the Children of Israel did not alter their language (“shelo shinu et leshonam”) that they were delivered from servitude in Egypt. In that merit, we will hopefully be delivered from this galut as well.

That caveat notwithstanding, we will soon be in our synagogues on Yom Kippur eve and reciting Kol Nidrei, with many of its words in Aramaic. A few days later, we will be sitting in our sukkot, where we will recite the short Ushpizin prayer which refers to the shiv’ah ro’im – the seven shepherds who are our ushpizin, our honored guests –Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Joseph, and David. Yet we do so in Aramaic and not necessarily in the presence of a quorum of ten. Why? This recitation is not a prayer, but rather our invitation and greeting to our Patriarchs to join with us and bear testimony as we fulfill G-d’s command.

May these mitzvot we fulfill serve us well as we seek Hashem’s blessing and deliverance, speedily in our days.