YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************

YHE-HALAKHA: A WEEKLY SHIUR ON HALAKHIC TOPICS

The Blessing of "Sim Shalom"

By Rav Mosheh Lichtenstein
Translated by David Silverberg

	The Hagahot Maimoniyot, towards the end of Hilkhot Tefilla, makes the following remark: 

"My master, our rabbi [the Maharam of Rothenberg] wrote that it must be ensured that another does not take his [the sheli'ach tzibbur's, or prayer leader's] place to dictate [the words of birkat Kohanim (the priestly blessing) for the Kohanim] and say Sim Shalom except someone who paid attention for the entire tefilla (prayer) with the sheli'ach tzibbur and did not talk while the sheli'ach tzibbur prayed."  

In other words, the one who would dictate birkat Kohanim for the Kohanim during the repetition of the Shemoneh Esrei - when the chazan was a Kohen - would then continue as the sheli'ach tzibbur for the concluding blessing, Sim Shalom.  The Maharam, as cited here and in other sources,[1] stipulates that this individual must have paid careful attention throughout the entire repetition until that point.  On this basis the Shulchan Arukh (O.C. 128:20) rules that "If the one dictating paid attention to the prayer of the sheli'ach tzibbur from beginning to end, it is preferable that he conclude with Sim Shalom."

	Thus, according to the Maharam, if the sheli'ach tzibbur, who would ordinarily call out the words of birkat Kohanim, is himself a Kohen, thus necessitating a substitute to dictate to the Kohanim in his place, that replacement continues with Sim Shalom.  This position seems very difficult to understand.  In such a situation, it turns out that the sheli'ach tzibbur never completes the entire Shemoneh Esrei.  True, the Maharam requires the replacement to have concentrated throughout the chazan's repetition of the Shemoneh Esrei.  Clearly, however, we do not generally allow two people to combine for the repetition of the Shemoneh Esrei.  Such an arrangement is sanctioned only "be-di'avad" (ex post facto), and indeed the mishna in Berakhot (34a) implies that only when the first chazan forgot a blessing (a case referred to in the mishna as "ta'a") do we call upon a replacement to continue.

	Though one may have sought to explain the Maharam's position by comparing his ruling to this situation of replacing the forgetful chazan, no such comparison may be sustained.  In the latter case, the first sheli'ach tzibbur loses his status as such as a result of his error; the replacement assumes the title of the first, stepping into his place, thus resulting in a joint communal prayer.  In the case of birkat Kohanim, however, the original chazan never lost his status; the second entered the scene not as a replacement, but rather to call out the words of birkat Kohanim.  The second thus does not assume the same status as the first.  

Two halakhot prove this basic distinction.  First, as we saw, the Maharam insists upon the second's having listened intently to the recitation of the first.  No such requirement exists regarding the substitute for the chazan who erred, as noted by the Beit Yoseif (126).  Even more revealing, halakha requires the substitute for the sheli'ach tzibbur who forgot the text to start from the beginning of the unit in which the first chazan erred.  For example, if the mistake occurred in one of the final three blessings of Shemoneh Esrei, the replacement must begin from Retzei.  The Maharam, however, has the one dictating birkat Kohanim replace the chazan in the middle of this unit; he need not begin with Retzei.[2] Evidently, as we claimed, the one calling out birkat Kohanim does not become a sheli'ach tzibbur; his status evolves merely from his having served as the "makri" (the one calling out the words) for the Kohanim.  

Our initial question now becomes even stronger: why does the sheli'ach tzibbur himself not complete the Shemoneh Esrei?  Why do we bring someone else - who does not earn the formal status of sheli'ach tzibbur - to recite the final blessing?  Indeed, widespread custom has not accepted this ruling of the Shulchan Arukh; it rather follows the view of Rashi there in Masekhet Berakhot, that the sheli'ach tzibbur himself recites Sim Shalom.  This is the ruling of the Gra (there in the Shulchan Arukh), as well.

	Clearly, the Maharam felt that Sim Shalom constitutes part of the fulfillment of birkat Kohanim. Sim Shalom represents an appeal for goodness and blessing that complements the administering of the priestly blessing and its acceptance on the part of Benei Yisrael.  Accepting the blessing and appropriately responding to it are obligations resting upon the congregation.  The Gemara (Sota 40a) says, "Is there a servant who is blessed and does not listen; is there a servant who is blessed and does not respond cordially?"  Indeed, my grandfather (Rav Soloveitchik) zt"l explained, based on this Gemara and the halakha requiring the Kohanim to face the congregation during the blessing, that the mitzva of birkat Kohanim requires the people's acceptance as well.[3] Within this framework, we must view Sim Shalom as a fulfillment of this requirement, the nation's acceptance of the blessing.  There can be no greater acceptance of the blessing than an appeal for the continuation of God's "shining His face" on them, a blessing granted in birkat Kohanim.  

Therefore, the Maharam held that specifically the one who calls out the words for the Kohanim, who is always a Yisrael (see Rambam, Hilkhot Tefilla 14:14, and Hagahot Maimoniyot), recites this blessing, rather than the original chazan, who is a Kohen.  Since it expresses the community's response to the priestly blessing, Sim Shalom is recited by a Yisrael.[4]

	Moreover, it appears as though this element does not simply add to the primary function of Sim Shalom, to serve as part of Shemoneh Esrei.  Rather, we are to define Sim Shalom mainly as a complement to birkat Kohanim.  The mishna (Rosh Hashana 32a) lists the blessings recited in the mussaf prayer on Rosh Hashana, and presents the final three blessings as "avoda" (referring to Retzei), "hoda'a" (referring to Modim), and "birkat Kohanim."[5] The mishna thus subsumes Sim Shalom under the title of birkat Kohanim, testifying to the fact that this association determines the very essence of Sim Shalom.  Naturally, then, we prefer to join this blessing to birkat Kohanim and the calling out of its words, even if this necessitates employing two chazanim for the repetition of Shemoneh Esrei.  By its very nature, Sim Shalom is connected to the calling out of birkat Kohanim by a Yisrael, by which the congregation fulfills its requirement of formally accepting the blessing.  The Yisrael dictating the words, rather than the Kohen serving as chazan, should thus recite Sim Shalom.

	Stated in even sharper terms, this halakha does not allow dividing the tefilla between two chazanim, for no division is even necessary: in essence, the Shemoneh Esrei ends after the blessing of "Modim."  After all, the basic structure of tefilla features the introductory "shevach" (praise of the Almighty), followed by the submission of our requests, and concluding with "hoda'a" (an expression of thanksgiving).  The blessing of Modim effectively expresses the required "hoda'a."  Sim Shalom has no place in this concluding unit; we can therefore view it only as an adjunct to birkat Kohanim.  Thus, we do not allow for two chazanim to divide Shemoneh Esrei between them.  The first completes the entire tefilla and the second recites the supplementary birkat Kohanim and its affiliate blessing, which together comprise a separate, independent entity.  

When I presented this analysis to my father (the Rosh Yeshiva, Rav Aharon Lichtenstein) shlit"a, he noted the Rambam's formulation (Hilkhot Tefilla 14:14) that outside the Mikdash birkat Kohanim is recited "after every tefilla except Mincha."  How can the Rambam describe birkat Kohanim as taking place "after tefilla;" doesn't it come in the middle of the Shemoneh Esrei?  According to what we have seen, the answer is clear: we conduct birkat Kohanim after tefilla just as in the Mikdash it occurred after the avoda (sacrificial rituals), as the Rambam explicitly writes in his comments preceding the aforementioned passage.  Its location, after Modim, is indeed after tefilla, as the blessing of Sim Shalom marks the response to birkat Kohanim, rather than the concluding blessing of Shemoneh Esrei.  

This theory also justifies the recitation of the introductory paragraph to birkat Kohanim - "Elokeinu ve-Elokei avoteinu."  Tosafot (Berakhot 34a, Menachot 44a) and other Rishonim addressed the possibility of this request constituting a "hefsek" (interruption) in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei.  According to what we have seen, however, this problem never arises: the prayer ends after Modim.  We conduct birkat Kohanim "after every prayer," and the introductory paragraph thus does not interrupt in the middle of Shemoneh Esrei.

	Needless to say, such a theory seems to oppose everything we know about Shemoneh Esrei.  Chazal instituted eighteen blessings - later adding a nineteenth - which include Sim Shalom.  They divided these blessings into three sections, referring to the final one as "shalosh acharonot" - the three final blessings (Retzei, Modim and Sim Shalom).  How may we sustain all that we have said until now?

	In order to plunge to the depths of this issue we must carefully understand the concept of the "shalosh acharonot."  The Rambam writes (Hilkhot Tefilla 1:4): 

"When Ezra and his court saw this, they arose and instituted for them a fixed arrangement of eighteen blessings.  The first three [consist of] praise to God, and the last three [consist of] thanksgiving.  The middle ones contain the requests of all the things… "  

It appears that the theme of thanksgiving alone characterizes the final three blessings.  Tosafot (Berakhot 34a) write along similar lines: 

"… Since [the final three-blessing unit] is entirely about praise, it is considered a single blessing."  

The obvious difficulty, however, arises: how can we view thanksgiving as the exclusive theme of this unit, when only one of the three blessings contained therein - "Modim" - speaks of this theme?  In both Retzei and Sim Shalom we submit requests to the Almighty, rather than offer words of thanksgiving.  Sure enough, the Geonim have pointed this out: 

"All three final blessings involve requests concerning the needs of the public.  Even 'Tiratzeh lefanekha avodateinu' that was recited in the Mikdash concerns a need [of this type].  Sim Shalom likewise involves such a need and an appeal for the public needs."[6]

	In the talmudic source of the Rambam's comments, however, we find a different formulation: 

"Rabbi Chanina said: In the first three, one resembles a servant presenting praise before his master; in the middle ones, he resembles a servant requesting a bonus from his master; in the final ones, he resembles a servant who received a bonus from his master and now takes leave." (Berakhot 34a)

The Gemara here never associates the final three blessings with the theme of "hoda'a," thanksgiving (as it defined the first three as "shevach" - the offering of praise).  Rather, it describes the purpose of this unit as the means by which we "take leave" of the Master.  Herein, it would seem, lies the central quality of these three blessings.  We do not have an independent obligation to offer thanksgiving which we accomplish through the recitation of this unit.  Rather, these final blessings involve the process of bringing the Shemoneh Esrei to a close and leaving the presence of the King before whom we stood during prayer.  The blessing of Modim plays a role in this process but does not define the entire unit.  This section therefore begins with the blessing of Retzei, a request for the acceptance of our prayers, the appropriate first stage of this process of conclusion.  Then comes the blessing of thanksgiving, which likewise marks a stage of our departing from God's presence.  A person cannot stand before the Almighty, place a request for the provision of his needs, and then immediately take leave without blessing God and thanking Him for His kindness.  The Gemara (Berakhot 34b) considers bowing during the recitation of Modim praiseworthy, while it condemns one who does so during the corresponding expressions of thanksgiving in Hallel and Birkat Ha-mazon.  The expression of thanksgiving in those contexts involves just that - the offering of thanks to the Almighty (for a miracle or food).  Bowing would constitute excessive praise of God, in violation of the Gemara's warning against overindulgence in praising Almighty (Berakhot 33b; Megilla 18a).  Bowing during Modim, however, is part of the process of departing from the King as we conclude our prayer.  It corresponds to the bowing at the beginning of Shemoneh Esrei, which signifies our approach to the Almighty.  The Gemara therefore looks favorably upon bowing at Modim in Shemoneh Esrei, while frowning upon doing so during its Hallel and Birkat Ha-mazon counterparts.

	Birkat Kohanim and Sim Shalom blend into Shemoneh Esrei as part of the fulfillment of this requirement.  Upon completing his petition before the Almighty, the worshipper receives a blessing from Him, at which point he takes leave.  He finishes the text of his prayer with the conclusion of Modim, but he remains standing before God prepared to depart His presence.  The concept of "Amida lifnei Hashem" - standing before God - lies at the heart of birkat Kohanim and its connection to tefilla.  This blessing is administered by the Almighty Himself through the Kohanim (as explained by the Rambam 15:6-7) and must therefore occur when its recipients stand in His presence.[7] This is why we conduct birkat Kohanim immediately following the service in the Mikdash or tefilla and why it is fundamentally bound together with these institutions - "We do not find 'nesi'at kapayim' without tefilla" (Yerushalmi, beginning of Ta'anit 4).  The acceptance of the blessing through the recitation of Sim Shalom marks the conclusion of our communion with the Almighty and the final stage of the process of leaving His presence, which is the function of the final three blessings.  The blessing of Sim Shalom contains a request for the extension of the blessing of the "shining of God's face," which the individual experiences as he stands before God in prayer, to the rest of his day.  This is the most befitting way to take leave of the Almighty before turning to one's own affairs.

	Sim Shalom is thus considered part of Shemoneh Esrei insofar as it participates in the process of "taking leave before the Master."  This process occurs at the conclusion of the tefilla, though as a final stage, after the completion of the text of the Shemoneh Esrei.  Sim Shalom comes as part of the valediction presented after the individual had already concluded his petition to his Creator.  It serves, whether within the framework of birkat Kohanim or independently thereof, to complete the concluding process of prayer and the taking leave of the King which we conduct by bowing before Him.

	In this light we may reconcile our contention that Sim Shalom stands separate from Shemoneh Esrei (and insertions such as the introductory paragraph to birkat Kohanim thus do not interrupt the prayer) with the blessing's inclusion in the "final three blessings."  The issue of "hefsek," a prohibited interruption in tefilla, involves two problems.  First, it interferes with the act of prayer, and secondly, it corrupts the text of the prayer.  The introduction to birkat Kohanim poses neither of these problems.  Regarding the act of prayer, which does not end until after the recitation of Sim Shalom, the purpose served by this paragraph in the context of birkat Kohanim renders it a legitimate inclusion in the service rather than an interference.  This will not surmount the second obstacle, the integrity of the liturgical text, which would be undermined by any external insertion, regardless of the purpose it serves.  As we said, however, Sim Shalom stands outside the formal text of Shemoneh Esrei; the introductory paragraph of birkat Kohanim thus does not disrupt the textual flow of Shemoneh Esrei.[8]

	The Gemara (Berakhot 34a) posits that "One may never ask for his needs in either the first three [blessings] or last three."  The Behag writes at the end of the fifth chapter of Berakhot[9], 

"Based on this, the rabbis do not allow the recitation of ma'amad [added supplications inserted into the Shemoneh Esrei], and we do not say even 'Zokhreinu le-chayim' in [the blessing of] Magen [Avraham].  All the more so we do not say 'Zekhor rachamekha u-khevosh ka'askha' in Modim.  However, we do recite 'Be-sefer chayim' in Sim Shalom since Shemoneh Esrei has been completed and it thus resembles tachanunim [additional prayers recited after the formal Shemoneh Esrei]."  

At first glance, this final remark appears incomprehensible.  Sim Shalom is part of the Amida; how could the Behag equate it with the prayers recited after the formal tefilla?  Indeed, the Beit Yosef expressed his bewilderment at such a notion: 

"But that which it is written that according to the Behag one recites 'Be-sefer chayim' in Sim Shalom because he has already completed [tefilla] and it is like reciting tachanunim after one's prayer - this I have not seen in any source and it also does not appear correct, for he has yet to conclude the blessing and is thus not considered as having completed his tefilla."  

In light of what we have seen, however, the Behag's position becomes clear.  Sim Shalom indeed takes place after the completion of tefilla, meaning, after the individual has completed the recitation of the text of Shemoneh Esrei, but while the act of prayer is still in progress.  In this sense, then, it assumes the same status as tachanunim, which similarly come after the formal text of Shemoneh Esrei, though the recitation of tachanunim extends the act of prayer.  This is evidenced by the fact that one who regularly recites tachanunim after the Amida need not return to the beginning of Shemoneh Esrei if during tachanunim he remembers that he omitted Ya'aleh Ve-yavo (see Berakhot 29b).  

The question, however, remains: What did the Gemara mean when it prohibited the insertion of requests in the final three blessings?  According to the Behag, one may insert requests in Sim Shalom; the Gemara should have therefore formulated the prohibition as pertaining only to Retzei and Modim!  We must explain that the Behag agrees with the distinction drawn by other Geonim between communal and personal requests.[10] The Gemara prohibited only the latter; requests concerning communal needs may be instituted in Shemoneh Esrei even in the final three blessings.  However, the Behag maintains a further distinction between Sim Shalom and its two preceding blessings, based on the difference between the text and act of prayer, as we discussed.  Requests concerning public needs do not interfere with one's taking leave of the King, since those needs are the "responsibility," as it were, of the King.  The process of leaving His presence thus includes the concern for communal welfare even after having departed from Him, parallel to our understanding of Sim Shalom generally.  In Retzei and Modim, by contrast, there arises as well the issue of the integrity of the liturgical text.  Any addition not initially included within the standardized text becomes a "hefsek," even if it deals with pressing communal needs.  Thus, when the Gemara included Sim Shalom in the prohibition against inserting requests, it outlawed only personal requests, which disrupt the act of prayer, during this blessing.  

	This same principle applies to the switching of chazanim: each recites a complete text, and no single prayer is divided among two people.  However, in order for the second's recitation of Sim Shalom to fulfill the role of accepting God's blessing, a necessary component of the process of departing the King's presence, it must relate to the prayer of the first.  The second chazan accomplishes this by listening intently to the first one's prayer, enabling him later to complete the process of the congregation's taking leave of the Almighty.  If he does not carefully listen to the rest of tefilla, his recitation of Sim Shalom cannot join the earlier recitation to fulfill its role.

	This approach may also resolve the difficulty raised by Rabbi Akiva Eiger (O.C. 126) as to why the second chazan need not return to Retzei, as a substitute chazan must when replacing the first anywhere in the final three blessings.  If a chazan must suddenly discontinue his prayer, thus necessitating a replacement, no continuum exists in the Shemoneh Esrei; the arrival of a new chazan marks an interruption in the prayer.  As we saw, the final three blessings must proceed in proper sequence in order to complete the process of leaving the King's presence.  If a new chazan enters onto the scene, he cannot associate his recitation of the final blessing with the previous two.  He must therefore return to the beginning of this unit.  Regarding the one calling out birkat Kohanim, however, his recitation of Sim Shalom and dictation of birkat Kohanim directly connect to birkat Kohanim.  By its very definition, these two join the preceding tefilla.  The second chazan is thus not an outsider disrupting the flow of the service, but rather part of its initially planned conclusion.

	This analysis may help us understand a unique phenomenon regarding Sim Shalom: the text of this blessing fluctuates depending on the prayer recited (shacharit, mincha, mussaf, arvit).  All other blessings retain their precise text in all prayers.  For one thing, the fact that this blessing does not belong to the main body of the Shemoneh Esrei allows for some flexibility concerning its textual content.  Moreover, insofar as Sim Shalom involves leaving God's presence after the tefilla, its content will naturally accommodate the time and text of the tefilla, depending on factors such as whether birkat Kohanim was conducted (or, according to another custom, whether the Torah was read at the given service).

	We may also add that in light of all this we can better understand the location of Ya'aleh Ve-yavo within Shemoneh Esrei.  As my grandfather zt"l explained at length, Ya'aleh Ve-yavo comprises an independent, external insertion into the Shemoneh Esrei, rather than an internal extension of individual blessings, as are Nachem and Al Ha-nissim.  The question nevertheless arises, why was Retzei selected as the point for the insertion of Ya'aleh Ve-yavo?  The two seem to bear little relevance with one another.  It would seem that we insert Ya'aleh Ve-yavo at this point because it marks the end of the tefilla.  Since, as we said, Ya'aleh Ve-yavo stands independently and does not form part of the inherent body of the Amida, it was placed towards the end of Shemoneh Esrei, just as we insert it towards the end of Birkat Ha-mazon.[11] Modim and its accompanying bows conclude the prayer; therefore, we insert Ya'aleh Ve-yavo just prior to that point, at the end of the essential tefilla.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Teshuvot, Pesakim U-minhagim Le-Maharam Me-Rothenberg (ed. Y.Z. Kahana), teshuvot 38-9; commentaries on the Tur 128.

[2] The Acharonim and commentators on the Tur and Shulchan Arukh dealt with this issue by comparing this halakha of birkat Kohanim and that of the sheli'ach tzibbur who forgot a blessing.  The Beit Yoseif and Darkhei Moshe (126, "Ve-da") write that essentially such a comparison is in order, but only in the case of birkat Kohanim is it possible to appoint the replacement ahead of time who will pay careful attention to the repetition; no such possibility exists in the case of an unexpected error.  Similarly, see Rabbi Akiva Eiger's "hagahot" on the Shulchan Arukh and the Chatam Sofer's letter to him (O.C. 21), in which they discuss this issue by comparing the two cases.  It would seem, however, that these two halakhot differ fundamentally one from the other, as we wrote, and this essential difference, rather than ancillary, technical factors, account for the halakhic discrepancies between them.

[3] See Shiurim Le-zekher Abba Mari, 2:220-224.

[4] See Ra'avan 61, who likewise understood that Sim Shalom fulfills an obligation associated with birkat Kohanim, thus posing the problem of "hefsek" - a prohibited interruption - between birkat Kohanim and Sim Shalom.  [My colleague Rav Yaakov Francus brought this point to my attention.]

[5] The Sefer Ha-itur had a different text of Rabbi Akiva's comments in the second part of the mishna: "avoda ve-hoda'a u-birkat Kohanim ve-Sim Shalom."  See Dikdukei Sofrim there.  In any event, an examination of the relevant sources reveals quite clearly that the generally accepted text is that found in common versions of the mishna, as we cited.

[6] Rav Hai Gaon, cited by the Rashba in Berakhot 34a; a similar citation appears in Tosafot.

[7] See the source cited earlier, in note 3, which elaborates at length on the principle of "Amida lifnei Hashem" as it pertains to birkat Kohanim.

[8] A similar phenomenon exists concerning the requirement of "semikhat ge'ula li-tefilla," juxtaposing the blessing of "Ga'al Yisrael" to Shemoneh Esrei in Shacharit and Arvit.  In Shacharit, both the text and the act must remain continuous, thus forbidding any type of "hefsek."  In Arvit, by contrast, halakha demands an uninterrupted act of recitation, but not a continuous text.  Interruptions such as kadish and the like are thus permitted in between "Ga'al Yisrael" and Shemoneh Esrei at Arvit.  See Ravya 25.  Comprehensive treatment of this issue lies beyond the purview of our discussion.

[9] Warsaw edition, 6b; cited by the Rashba there in Berakhot and the Tur 582.

[10] Sure enough, the Tur (112) cites this position in the name of the Behag.  We may not, however, dismiss the possibility that the Behag was confused with Rav Hai Gaon, as the acronym of Rav Hai Gaon - "Rehag" - closely resembles "Behag," and all the Rishonim bring this approach in the name of Rav Hai.  This citation in the Tur thus does not provide ironclad proof for our argument.

[11] We assume here that the main text of Birkat Ha-mazon comes to an end with the blessing, "Bonei Yerushalayim," as the fourth blessing, "Ha-tov Ve-hameitiv," is not included in the main body of Birkat Ha-mazon.  See Berakhot 46a, 49a; Rambam and Ra'avad Hilkhot Berakhot 2:12.

(This shiur appeared originally in Hebrew in a memorial volume for Rav Soloveitchik zt"l entitled "Zikhron Ha-Rav," ed. A. Shmidman and J. Wieder.)