Kiddush (4)

 

THE LAWS OF SHABBAT

By Rav Doniel Schreiber

 

NEW PUBLICATIONS FROM YESHIVAT HAR ETZION:

Rav Aharon Lichtenstein’s “Varieties of Jewish Experience” is now available in Israel!

Rav Amital memorial volume “Le-ovdekha Be-Emet” (in Hebrew) is now available in the USA!

Discounted prices for VBM readers. 

Details here: http://www.haretzion.org/torah/yeshiva-publications.

 

 

Shiur #10: Kiddush – Part 4

Kiddush on Shabbat Day – cont.

 

 

G.  Ein kiddush Ela Be-makom Se'uda

 

            According to the Shulchan Arukh (OC 273:1), as noted in "Kiddush - part 2," one is required to recite kiddush in a place where the meal will follow (ein kiddush ela be-makom se'uda).  There are two ways to interpret this requirement:  1. The meal establishes the significance of the kiddush; or 2. The kiddush dedicates the meal as a Shabbat meal.  (For further research: These two interpretations may be rooted in the Rashbam on Pesachim 101a, s.v. Af yedei kiddush).

 

            These differing interpretations lead to important practical differences.  For example, what kind of "meal" is required to satisfy the requirement of "kiddush be-makom se'uda?"  According to the first approach, the meal is merely required to enhance the kiddush, one does not need a true meal to fulfill this requirement.  Even eating mezonot, such as cake or cookies, or drinking an additional revi'it of wine, suffice to enhance mitzvat kiddush.  Since the goal of the meal is to insure that kiddush not stand alone, it is sufficient if even a basic meal accompanies it.  This is the opinion of the Geonim (OC 273:5).

 

            According to the second interpretation that kiddush preceding a meal establishes the meal as se'udat Shabbat, then a true meal consisting of bread (see Berakhot 49b and Tosafot ibid. s.v. Iy baiy akhil) is required since otherwise it is not a Shabbat meal.  This is the opinion of the Vilna Gaon (Sefer Ma'aseh Rav no. 122) and Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l (Igrot Moshe YD, vol. 2, no. 163, and ibid. OC vol. 4, no 63).  See Eretz Ha-Tzvi by m"v Rav Hershel Schachter shlita, pp. 46-47, par. 8.

 

            A second practical difference between these two approaches may be whether one fulfills mitzvat kiddush without eating or drinking anything afterwards.  According to the first approach (i.e., the position of the Geonim) that kiddush cannot stand alone, one clearly does not fulfill kiddush in this manner.  Furthermore, it would be prohibited to drink the kiddush wine if one will not eat afterwards.  This is because if one does not fulfill kiddush by eating afterwards, by drinking the kiddush wine one has violated the prohibition of drinking prior to reciting kiddush.

 

            Does one fulfill kiddush without eating according to the approach which emphasizes the role of kiddush in establishing a Shabbat meal?  This depends upon how we interpret this requirement.  On the one hand, it might mean that although the Shabbat meal must be preceded by kiddush, kiddush can be fulfilled independent of a meal.  In fact, this is the ruling of R. Moshe Feinstein zt"l (Igrot Moshe YD, vol. 2, no. 163, and ibid. OC vol. 4, no 63; see, however, OC 273:3).  On the other hand, one could interpret kiddush's role in the Shabbat meal as organic.  According to this approach, Chazal specifically legislated the mitzva of kiddush al ha-kos (kiddush on a cup of wine) in the context of a true meal consisting of bread.  Thus, not only would one not fulfill kiddush without eating afterwards, but even if one ate mezonot following kiddush, it would not be sufficient.  One would only fulfill kiddush if the kiddush was followed by a meal consisting of bread.  This is the position of the Vilna Gaon (Sefer Ma'aseh Rav no. 122) as understood by the Rav zt"l, Maran R. Joseph B. Ha-levi Soloveitchik.  See Shiurim Le-zekher Abba Mari z"l, vol. 2, 'Kiddush ve-havdala', pp. 105-122, Eretz Ha-Tzvi by m"v Rav Hershel Schachter shlita, pp. 46-47, par. 8, Bi'ur Halakha 273:5, and Ha'got R. Akiva Eiger 273:5.  See also OC 273:3 which seems to reflect this opinion.

 

            In light of the above dispute, what is the justification for the widespread custom Shabbat morning after tefilla of reciting kiddush and merely eating mezonot afterwards?  What is the rationale to be lenient in practice?  According to Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l, regardless of whether one rules like the Geonim or not, this custom is readily understood, because kiddush does not have to be followed by a true meal.  Kiddush may not require a meal at all.  At most a mere "meal" of mezonot would suffice.  Thus, a kiddush which is followed by a "meal" of mezonot satisfies all opinions according to R. Feinstein zt"l.

 

            However, according to the position of the Rav zt"l, this custom is difficult to understand.  This is because he understands that the Vilna Gaon, who disputes the Geonim, requires that kiddush be followed by a true meal.  What is the justification, then, to be lenient in practice?  Why do we not follow the opinion of the Vilna Gaon?  The Rav zt"l suggested that the custom of following kiddush with mezonot Shabbat morning is rooted in a safek sefeika (a double doubt).  First, it is possible that the law is accordance with the Geonim who are satisfied with kiddush being followed by a "meal" of mezonot; and second, even if the law is that kiddush must be followed by a true meal, perhaps the law is in accordance with the Ra'avad (Shabbat 29:10) who allows one to eat prior to kiddush on Shabbat day.  Thus, explained the Rav zt"l, the custom on Friday night, where this safeik sefeika does not exist, is to follow kiddush with a true meal.  There is no safek sefeika Friday night because even the Ra'avad forbids eating prior to Friday night kiddush.

 

            Although, on Shabbat day, many people do not repeat kiddush at home after kiddush in shul, according to the Rav zt"l the more correct custom would be to recite kiddush again at home prior to eating one's Shabbat meal.  This is because while eating mezonot after kiddush may be justified by relying on the above safeik sefeika, there is no such safeik sefeika to justify dispensing with kiddush prior to the Shabbat meal.  All that exists is a dispute amongst the poskim as to whether the Shabbat meal must be preceded by kiddush or not.  Therefore, it is preferable to satisfy all opinions and recite kiddush again prior to the meal.

 

            A more lenient opinion is that of the Magen Avraham (OC 274:2).  He asserts that if one does not wish to eat a meal Friday night, one may eat three meals on Shabbat day.  In this case, he rules that one should recite kiddush Friday night and rely on the Geonim that it is sufficient for kiddush to be followed by merely mezonot or an additional revi'it of wine.  This ruling also supports the widespread custom of following kiddush Shabbat morning with merely a "meal" of mezonot.  Moreover, this opinion of the Magen Avraham, which clearly rules in accordance with the Geonim, justifies the custom of not reciting kiddush again at home after fulfilling kiddush with mezonot in shul.  This is because the Geonim only require a "meal" of mezonot for kiddush; they do not require kiddush for the Shabbat meal.

 

            Finally, the extreme position held by Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l (Igrot Moshe YD, vol. 2, no. 163, and ibid. OC vol. 4, no 63) - as mentioned above, he rules that the Shabbat meal requires kiddush, but that kiddush does not require any meal whatsoever - leads to an interesting halakhic ruling.  According to Rav Moshe zt"l, one may recite and fulfill kiddush in shul without even eating mezonot afterwards.  However, one would have to recite kiddush again prior to eating the true meal in order that the meal be established as a Shabbat meal.

 

            How much must one consume to meet the requirements of "se'uda" (a meal) for the purpose of kiddush be-makom se'uda?  Depending upon how one rules in the above dispute, the mekadesh and those who hear this kiddush must eat either a kezayit (olive size) of bread or even a kezayit of mezonot (pastries) or an additional revi'it of wine (MB 273:25,27) or grape juice (Rav Moshe Feinstein zt"l cited in The Radiance of Shabbat, p.61, note 21), but not chamar medina (the drink of the land - see previous shiur, and MB 273:25).  The bread or pastries must be made from the five species of grain - wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye (MB 273:25).  This kezayit must be eaten tokh kedei akhilat pras (the time it takes to eat a half a loaf of bread), which is between 2-9 minutes.

 

            Those who are stringent on Pesach not to eat 'gebrockt' (matza mixed with water) must eat matza following kiddush to fulfill kiddush be-makom seuda, since their 'cookies' are made merely of potato starch.

 

            However, according to Rav Moshe zt"l, as mentioned above, there is no need to follow kiddush with any "meal" whatsoever.  It is only the Shabbat meal which must be preceded by kiddush.  Nonetheless, the prevailing custom seems to require kiddush to be followed by minimally a kezayit of mezonot.

 

            If one is weak, we are lenient in fulfilling the specifications of kiddush be-makom se'uda for Shabbat morning kiddush by allowing fruit to satisfy the requirement of "se'uda."  This is because the She'iltei Giborim writes that all forms of meals are considered complete meals on Shabbat, even those consisting solely of fruit.  While this is not the accepted opinion, in a case of need we rely on it for kiddusha rabba, inasmuch as it is a rabbinic law. (OC 273:26)

 

H.  Must One Sit or Stand for Kiddusha Rabba?

 

            There are different minhagim as to whether one should sit or stand for Shabbat morning kiddush.  (See Sha'arei Teshuva, OC 289:1, and Sefer Mishnat Chassidim 1:5.)

 

            We will discuss the obligations of lechem mishneh (the two loaves) and eating three meals on Shabbat in the forthcoming shiur.