0

What is the halachic reasoning for adding/deleting this line to the Kaddish? Is it unique to just Nusach Sefard and Edot HaMizrach? It seems to also be near universal amongst Dati Leumi minyanim in Israel, what is the reason for this, if there is one?

4
  • 2
    Are you sure the dati Leumi congregations you've seen weren't simply sefard? – robev Apr 12 at 6:49
  • 1
  • 1
    How is this different from any other variant Nusach which different communities have and don't have? – Double AA Apr 12 at 11:48
  • Welcome to Mi Yodeya! I suspect that as @robev wrote, you've mostly been to Dati minyanim in Israel with Sefard or Sephardic chazanim, because the Ashkenaz generally don't say that phrase. – Harel13 Apr 12 at 13:30
2

I do not think we can identify precisely what the origin of the phrase is. What we can attest to is which early sources either included it (eg Rasag, Rambam, et al) or absented it (Mahzor Vitry, Roqeah, Sefer haMinhagim, et al).

Moshe Halamish (ch. 30 of הקבלה בתפילה בהלכה ובמנהג) produces a lengthy list of sources, ranging from early siddurim, halakhic codes, commentaries on the siddur, etc. on both sides during the medieval era. He also tentatively suggests that in Italy, France, Northern Spain, i.e. lands where Christianity predominated, it was deleted due to the possible danger associated with its recitation. However he admits that this perspective is not without challenge due to the various cases of exception that can be identified.

Other than the matter of not departing from one's received nusah (which is a point that could be rallied by either side in favor of its inclusion/exclusion), I'm not sure why you assume that the different traditions on this point are rooted in a halakhic rationale. While there are many occasions on which differences in nusah are rooted in differences of halakhic opinion, I do not see this as being one of those occasions.

0

The Rambam when he brings down the Nusach of Tefila (at the end of Sefer Ahava), writes that one should say ויצמח פורקניה ויקרב משיחיה. However, he does not say that one should answer Amen to this.

Rabbi Shlomo Lorincz in his book, "In their Shadow" writes that Rabbi Yitzchok Zev Soloveitchik (1886-1959), better known as the Brisker Rav when attending a minyan in which the nusach was ויצמח פורקניה ויקרב משיחיה, he would not answer Amen as the Rambam writes.

8
  • 2
    While perhaps an interesting factoid, how does this answer the question? – Double AA Apr 12 at 12:33
  • OP asked the reason why people say this. I found a source in the Rambam why this is. To answer why many in the Dati Leumi community say this, this is to do with the majority of the Zionist Movement spreading to Poland and Vienna where people were more accustomed to daven Nusach Sefard. The movement wasn't so strong in Lithuania and Belarus, which is why majority of Chareidi Yeshivish stick to Nusach Ashkenaz and miss out ויצמח פורקניה ויקרב משיחיה. – MiZeh Apr 12 at 12:48
  • Seemingly the OP was aware that there are siddurim that print the text. What does this add? – Double AA Apr 12 at 12:50
  • The reason why most Dati Leumi congregations add this as oppose to more Charedi circles. – MiZeh Apr 12 at 12:55
  • "Vienna where people were more accustomed to daven Nusach Sefard." LOL, especially before WWII. – Kazi bácsi Apr 12 at 13:03
0

As pointed out in a different answer, the Rambam says to include the phrase as part of Kaddish. It is very logical to include it as well. The whole Kaddish is praying for G-d's greatness and exaltedness to be revealed to the whole world. The time when this will be carried out will be the Messianic era. Thus, it's very appropriate to include it. The question therefore is: why do Ashkenazim not say it?

In Aleinu Leshabeach in Parshas Vayechi, there appears an explanation in the name of Rav Mordechai Shulman of why Ashkenazi custom leaves out the phrase.

The Gemara (Sanhedrin 98b) quotes the amoraim Ulla and Rabba as saying:

ייתי ולא איחמיניה Let the Messiah come, but after my death, so that I will not see him, as I fear the suffering that will precede his coming.

(The non-bolded words are the explanation from R' Steinsaltz)

In other words, as much as we want Moshiach to come, there is also reason to hope not to actually see him in our lifetime since his coming will be accompanied with lots of suffering. Based on this, we do not add in the words "May He make the salvation sprout forth and bring His Moshiach close" to Kaddish, even though it fits with the general theme of Kaddish. As much as we are praying for salvation, this is one facet of the redemption that we would prefer not to be hastened.

It should be mentioned that although Rav Shulman used the gemara to explain the custom of ommitting the phrase, it is not clear that he was actually explaining the original source of the minhag. He may just have been giving an explanation of the custom, not the source.

(It should be mentioned that in that same gemara, Rav Yosef emphatically declares that he wants to see the coming of Moshiach and would be willing to suffer any negative consequence necessary. If Rav Shulman was in fact bringing the gemara as the original source for the custom not to say ויצמח, then presumably, those who do say ויצמח are following Rav Yosef in this matter.)

7
  • Come on this is ridiculous, do we also need to ask why nusach sefardi doesn't include ויפרוק עמיה too since "it's very appropriate to include it" too?? Until you show one is definitely older than the other you have no basis for making up reasons for why one side allegedly deliberately changed it. – Double AA Apr 12 at 18:31
  • @DoubleAA just to clarify, what are you saying is rediculous? The OP's original question? The explanation from Rav Shulman? I was simply pointing out that the halachic basis for including the phrase is the Rambam, and that his horaah is logical (even though I don't remember if he has a source for his nusach). That sets up the question- if the Rambam poskens something which is logical, why not follow it? Usually, when we disagree with Rambam, we have a reason for it. To which the answer- even though moshiach is part of the gilui, there's reason not to include mention of it. What's rediculous? – Binyomin Apr 12 at 18:40
  • Currently this whole page is ridiculous. Someone asks the origin of the different common customs. One "answer" writes that the origin for one side's position is it's written in a siddur. What a bombshell. Then you come along with a further bomb kasha of how then can the other side argue??????? Seemingly the answer to your question is just it says it the other way in a different siddur. And we all walk away no smarter than before. (And tricked into forgetting that Rambam also wrote to say ויפרוק עמיה) – Double AA Apr 12 at 18:50
  • Instead you should frame the suggestion here that Ashkenazim and Sefardim are playing out a huge philosophical machloket about desiring seeing mashiach as just that: an explanation for each side. (The suggestion itself is perhaps interesting as a drasha but thoroughly unconvincing if not preposterous to think that all and only sefard daveners did and do believe in wanting to live to see mashiach...) – Double AA Apr 12 at 18:53
  • @DoubleAA I partially agree with you; without knowing which version is older, it's not really fair to ask which side "changed" it. A better way of asking the question is simply- why do Sefardim say it and ashkenazim don't? What is the basis for the variations? Likewise I agree that Rav Shulman may have been saying it as a drasha, not actually as providing a real source. I wrote based off his assumption, but perhaps he didn't mean it as far as I suggested. Is there really a machlokes ashkenazim/sefardim in the maskana of that gemara, whether we want to see moshiach? Sounds doubtful.) – Binyomin Apr 12 at 19:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .