Rabannan in Berakhot 31a say that we should stand to pray "מתוך הלכה פסוקה". But later the Gemara says that Rabannan acted in accordance with the Mishna (30b; 5:1), while on the other hand Rav Ashi followed the Baraita above. It is clear that there is a disjunction between these two views because Tosfos dh. רבנן עבדי says "וכותייהו קי"ל": we rule like Rabannan but not Rav Ashi, ie. not praying after studying halacha pesuka.

But it seems like other authorities have inferred a way around this disjunction.

(Tosfos does say that we can pray after דברי תורה such as the Tehillim mentioned, but this does not refer to studying halacha of any kind. Instead it is only those דברי תורה which come under the more general condition of שמחה של מצוה.)

  • However, Rambam (Tefilla 4:18) has הלכות פסוקות under the category of דברי תורה. Obviously this is true in a general sense (Halacha is part of the Torah), but דברי תורה themselves were not one of the prerequisites for tefilla mentioned in the Gemara. It was only inferred in so far as it came under שמחה של מצוה.

  • And the Tur and Rema (OC 93:3) infers that halacha pesuka "נמי כמו מתוך שמחה", is like the שמחה של מצוה, so we study it before prayer.

See also Yerushalmi Berakhot 5:1.4 says to pray after studying halacha pesuka. See the note there: "In the Babli, this is a baraita and is considered a contrast to, not an explanation of, the requirement of the Mishnah that one pray only in a serious frame of mind. In the Yerushalmi it is considered to be the genuine interpretation of the Mishnah."

How can the Rambam and Tur work around what seems to be a clear decision in the Gemara and Tosfos that we do not pray after studying halacha pesuka? It seems like this is grounded in a different interpretation of what constitutes שמחה של מצוה.



You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .