Siman 128, Se'if 5 · A close reading of the Mishnah Berurah's wording

Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 128, se'if 5. We continue our study of the Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 18, regarding going up to the duchan in socks:

"The Acharonim wrote that it is not proper to go up to the duchan actually barefoot, since this is a manner of disgrace, for nowadays people are not accustomed to walk barefoot before important people. Rather one should go up in cloth foot-coverings, and such is the custom."

(Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 18)

A close reading of the Mishnah Berurah's wording

• "Actually barefoot": The emphasis is necessary, because a person walking in socks without shoes might also be called "barefoot." The Mishnah Berurah stresses that the prohibition is walking truly barefoot, with no covering at all on the foot.
• The reason for the prohibition: It is "a manner of disgrace," and in his words, "for nowadays people are not accustomed to walk barefoot before important people." In other words, the reason is not sanctity as such, but the accepted norm of respect.
• The practical conclusion: One should go up in "cloth foot-coverings," meaning socks, and this is the custom.

Background: the parallel between Birkas Kohanim and the service in the Beis Hamikdash

• The points of comparison: A number of laws of Birkas Kohanim are derived from its resemblance to the service in the Beis Hamikdash: an additional washing of the hands (se'if 6, below), reciting the berachah while standing, and some of the disqualifications that apply to kohanim. The comparison is not absolute, but there is a connection, since the shul is called a miniature Mikdash.
• The kohanim in the Mikdash served barefoot: The floor of the azarah was holy, and the kohanim performed the service barefoot.

"Remove your shoes from your feet"

(the revelation at the burning bush)

• The meaning of removing the shoe: Wearing shoes in a holy place is not a display of respect, and walking barefoot expresses a release from earthiness and a standing in a holy place. This idea has existed in Judaism from earliest times, as we see in Tanach and in the Beis Hamikdash.
• Signs of respect among mankind: Removing one's shoes is one of the signs of respect accepted throughout the world in every generation, just as some have the practice of removing their hat before an important person. There is no need to say that one influenced the other.
• The two sides of our question: On the one hand, if the kohen's service at the duchan resembles the service in the Mikdash, it would seem fitting for him to stand barefoot. On the other hand, a shul is not the Beis Hamikdash but only a miniature Mikdash, so the comparison is not complete.

Entering a shul in shoes: the question in the Arab lands

• The Gemara's ruling: The Gemara states explicitly that one may enter a shul wearing shoes, since it is not the Beis Hamikdash but only a miniature Mikdash.
• The question posed to the son of the Rambam: The Muslims were mocking the Jews: among them one enters the mosque barefoot and they spread out carpets, while the Jews enter their shul in shoes. Should one therefore remove one's shoes upon entering a shul?
• The debate that arose: Is this a matter of following the practices of the nations, or is it in fact proper behavior out of respect for the shul?
• The practice in fact: In the Arab lands the custom was to remove one's shoes upon entering the shul, and some attributed this to the hot climate as well. In Ashkenaz, by contrast, most of the sages said that one enters a shul in shoes, as the Gemara rules.

Deciding according to local custom

• The principle: Most of the answers the sages gave to questions of this type depend on place and time, since it is the public that determines what constitutes respect and what constitutes disgrace.
• An example from the Rambam: The Rambam writes that walking barefoot is not an accepted way to go about, and likewise that a talmid chacham should wear long sleeves even though the general public wore short sleeves. Clearly we are dealing with a behavioral norm and not an absolute definition.
• The Mishnah Berurah spoke for his own land and place: The poskim say that what the Mishnah Berurah wrote was said according to his locale, where in Europe it was not accepted to walk barefoot, and therefore he required at least socks, as is the practice today.
• Eretz Yisrael: Some poskim wrote that in Eretz Yisrael perhaps the matter is not so severe, since in the summer people walk in sandals without socks.
• The suggested standard: Some wrote that the test is whether he would appear this way before an important official or before a king, in sandals without socks or with socks. It depends on the place and on the person.
• In practice: Some poskim say that no clear-cut answer can be given, and one should not tell a kohen who goes up without socks that this is not the way to go up, since this is a matter with no fixed measure. If even to an important event he goes without socks, there is no disrespect on his part. But if for important events he wears socks and only here does he remove them, he should understand on his own that this is not becoming, and the matter is left to his own judgment.

Pressing circumstances: soldiers and one who cannot remove his shoes

• The problem in the army: A kohen standing in army boots who is heading out on an operation right after davening. Removing the boots and putting them back on is a delay and a bother.
• The basis for leniency: There is no inherent prohibition in shoes; the entire prohibition is a rabbinic enactment of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, whereas Birkas Kohanim is a positive mitzvah.
• The leniency brought by the Acharonim: Its source is that when the kohen is not standing on the duchan but on the floor itself, there is greater room to permit him to remain in his shoes. Therefore, under pressing circumstances he is permitted to recite the berachah in his shoes, even leather shoes and even shoes with laces, on condition that he stand below on the floor and not go up with the other kohanim.
• A further case: One who has wounds on his feet and bandages, for whom removing the shoes and putting them back on is a great bother, is also considered to be in pressing circumstances, and he is permitted in the same way.

Going up to the duchan in shorts

• The question: A kohen who leaves for work immediately after davening, as on a kibbutz, and comes to daven in shorts and sandals. The question was asked on kibbutzim, including well-known questions from Beit She'an.
• The answer: Some rabbanim say that it is difficult to give an absolute answer, since it depends on local custom and on how that person presents himself generally: if this is how he comes to the dining hall and this is how he comes to a wedding, there is no disrespect in his dress. Even today there are communities where people come to a wedding in the clothing they wear to work. These are matters with no fixed measure, and every place follows its own custom.

The kohen standing in an elevated place: "going up to the duchan"

• Two terms for the same mitzvah: On the one hand, "nesias kapayim," the lifting of the hands, and on the other, "going up to the duchan." The Yerushalmi too uses the language of going up to the duchan, and in Yiddish the term became "duchenen." Regarding the levi'im it says that they stand on the duchan, while regarding the kohanim the language used is specifically going up.
• The position of Rav Waldenberg: He holds very strongly that the kohen must stand in an elevated place, based on the expression "going up to the duchan." In the Beis Hamikdash too there were steps, and likewise in shuls there are steps before the aron kodesh.
• In practice according to this view: In a shul that has no steps, one should take a bench and turn it over so that the kohen can stand on it and be higher than the people (and of course, if there is danger involved, that is another matter). And if this is not possible, he is hesitant about whether one should go up to the duchan at all.
• The carpet solution: Some said that when there is no elevated place, one spreads a carpet or a small rug under the kohanim's feet. It is not a perfect solution, but at least it shows that the kohen is in a different position than the congregation. Others explained the small rug with a simpler reason: so that his foot should not be cold.
• A note on understanding customs: When a person sees a custom and does not know its source, it becomes in his eyes like a halachah given to Moshe at Sinai. Thus there are those who spread the carpet on the steps themselves, even though the steps already elevate the kohen and the carpet serves no purpose. It looks nice, but it is not an obligation. One should know where each custom comes from.

A shaliach tzibbur who is a kohen

• Going up to the duchan: By and large, a shaliach tzibbur who is a kohen, when there are other kohanim present, does not go up to the duchan but remains standing in his place. The question of how many other kohanim are needed, two or whether one suffices, will be clarified later on.
• Where the shaliach tzibbur stands: Chazal use two expressions: "goes down before the ark" and "passes before the ark." "Goes down" because the place of the shaliach tzibbur was low, whereas the kohen must be raised above the people. Today we are not particular about lowering the place of the shaliach tzibbur.

The three reasons given regarding shoes

1. The enactment of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai: In themselves shoes present no problem; rather, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai enacted this because of the laces: perhaps a knot would come undone, and he would step down from the duchan to the side to tie his shoe, and onlookers would say that he stepped down because a disqualification was found in him.
2. The honor of the congregation (Pri Chadash): Even though cloth shoes present no concern of laces, nevertheless the kohen came in them along the road, through mud and mire, and it is not respectful to the congregation for him to go up to the duchan in them.
3. Distracting the congregation: From the first reason it emerges that the congregation is part of the picture, since the concern is over what the onlookers will say and over embarrassment before the congregation. From here we see room to be concerned about the reverse as well: that something unusual about the kohen will draw the eyes of the congregation.

• Expanding on the third reason: Later on it will be explained that one should not gaze at the kohanim during the berachah. Therefore, if a kohen has something about him that sets him apart from the congregation, for example that his hands are red, there is a question whether he should go up to the duchan, out of concern that the people will stare at him and not concentrate on the berachah. There are two explanations offered for this, which will be discussed in their place. Today we cover the hands with a tallis, which was not the case in the past, and that too requires elaboration in its place.

The question of colored socks

• The question asked in our generation: In light of the Mishnah Berurah's ruling that he should go up in socks, today there are socks of every type and kind, with pictures, patterns and colors, unlike in the past when there were only black or white socks. If so, perhaps the eyes of the congregation will be drawn to look at the socks and examine them, just as we were concerned about something unusual about the kohen.
• The poskim's answer: Since the Mishnah Berurah wrote socks, and this has been accepted over the generations, we do not distinguish between white socks, black socks or colored socks.
• The difficulty that remains: Logically the answer is a bit hard, since when a kohen goes up in conspicuous socks, it stands to reason that they draw the eye, and that is the entire basis of the concern.

Why we are stricter about distraction during Birkas Kohanim than during davening

• The stringency of Birkas Kohanim: There are matters about which Chazal were especially particular, and Birkas Kohanim is among them. Causing distraction during Birkas Kohanim is graver in the eyes of Chazal than a person who lets his mind wander during davening.
• The length of time: Birkas Kohanim is a brief span of time, twenty or thirty seconds, and for that entire time a person must be together with the kohanim. Davening, by contrast, is long, and if he did not concentrate in one berachah he has the opportunity to concentrate later, for example at "Shema Yisrael."

Additional questions that were asked

• A yisrael coming to shul: The question was asked whether a yisrael coming to shul must come wearing socks. The answer: every place according to its custom. If he does not go to a wedding in socks, it is not demanded of him for shul either.
• A kohen with bandages and wounds on his feet: If the bandage is under the sock, there is no objection. But a kohen who goes up barefoot and has wounds on his feet, that is a problem.

Introduction to se'if 6: the kohanim washing their hands

"Even though the kohanim washed their hands in the morning, they wash them again up to the joint, which is the connection of the hand and the forearm."

(Shulchan Aruch)

• The source of the law: Up to here there is nothing novel; this is an explicit law in the Gemara. The kohanim in the Mikdash washed their hands in the morning and washed again before the service, and so too the kohanim who go up to the duchan.

"And the levi pours water on their hands, and beforehand the levi washes his own hands."

(Shulchan Aruch)

• The source of this law: The pouring of the water by the levi is not written in the Gemara but comes from the Zohar. This is a classic example of a law that entered halachah from the Zohar, and it can even create practical difficulties, as the Mishnah Berurah will point out.
• The levi's own washing: According to the Shulchan Aruch, the levi too washes his hands first.

"But the levi'im have not had the practice of washing their hands first; they rely on their washing in the morning."

(Rema)

(The explanation of this whole topic will be given in the next shiur.)

In passing · Lighting the candles and singeing them

1. "When you kindle the lamps"

• The precision of the verse: Why does it say "be-ha'aloscha," when you cause the lamps to rise, rather than a term of kindling? Rashi explains that the wording teaches that the flame must rise up on its own, meaning that the kohen kindles until the flame ascends by itself and no longer flickers, until it is steady.
• The custom derived from this: Some have the practice on Friday night that the husband "singes" the candles, that is, lights them and extinguishes them, so that when the wife lights, the flame will rise immediately and take hold nicely on the wick. The source of the custom is the service in the Mikdash.
• When lighting with oil: When lighting with oil one should first blacken the tip of the wick, and then it burns nicely. This depends on the manner of lighting and the type of wick, and with glass cups where the wick is left in place and one merely adds oil, matters are different. Each person according to his own custom, and there is no obligation in this.

2. With which oils may one light

"All oils are fit... Rabbi Tarfon says: one may light only with olive oil."

(Mishnah)

• The halachah: All oils are fit for lighting the Shabbos candles as long as they give good light. Rabbi Tarfon's view is a lone opinion in the Mishnah, and we do not rule like him.
• The practice of the Vilna Gaon: It is related about the Gaon of Vilna that he was particular to light in his home only with olive oil, and people wondered how he followed specifically the opinion of Rabbi Tarfon. That is the tradition we have received.
• Paraffin oil and the like: As long as the oil burns nicely, there is no problem with it.

3. Ready-made wicks and singeing

• The question: Even before the candles in use today were invented, a question was asked about ready-made wicks, whose wick is firm and catches fire immediately, unlike the older wicks. Does the custom of the husband singeing the candles apply to these as well?
• What is brought in the poskim: True, the candle will light well even without singeing, but it is the custom of Israel that the husband does so, and therefore he should do so with these wicks too. There are also homiletical explanations given as to why it is important that the husband be the one to do it.