6

In his siddur, Rav Sa`adya haGaon (Rasa"g) explains in practical detail the various tefilloth be-ssibur (prayers performed with a congregation) and never mentions or gives the text for 'Modhim DeRabbanan." Rather, it is omitted completely.

Question: Is there a source for omitting the "Modhim DeRabbanan"?

| improve this question | |
  • A copy of the sidduer with commentary from 1963 is available here: hebrewbooks.org/20685 – Seraphya Oct 29 '13 at 3:28
  • @Seraphya That was already linked to in the question. – Double AA♦ Oct 29 '13 at 3:29
  • Sounds like those congregations who daven Heicha Kedusha at every minyan. They also omit Birkath Kohanim – Adam Mosheh Oct 29 '13 at 22:52
1

RaSaG omits Modim d'rabbanan because the talmud is inconclusive about it. Here is the gemara on Sota 40a.

בזמן ששליח צבור אומר מודים העם מה הם אומרים אמר רב מודים אנחנו לך ה' אלהינו על שאנו מודים לך ושמואל אמר אלהי כל בשר על שאנו מודים לך רבי סימאי אומר יוצרנו יוצר בראשית על שאנו מודים לך נהרדעי אמרי משמיה דרבי סימאי ברכות והודאות לשמך הגדול על שהחייתנו וקיימתנו על שאנו מודים לך רב אחא בר יעקב מסיים בה הכי כן תחיינו ותחננו ותקבצנו ותאסוף גליותינו לחצרות קדשך לשמור חוקיך ולעשות רצונך בלבב שלם על שאנו מודים לך אמר רב פפא הילכך נימרינהו לכולהו

There is a similar discussion with fewer participants towards the end of brachos about the proper conclusion to Asher Yatzar

מאי חתים אמר רב רופא חולים אמר שמואל קא שוינהו אבא לכולי עלמא קצירי אלא רופא כל בשר רב ששת אמר מפליא לעשות א"ר פפא הלכך נמרינהו לתרוייהו רופא כל בשר ומפליא לעשות

I do not have access to RaSaG's siddur but it would be interesting to see how he treats the asher yatzar question.

| improve this answer | |
  • What could be more conclusive than R Papa's conclusion? Also, what makes you think that Rasag took this factor into account? – Double AA♦ Oct 29 '13 at 1:47
  • My understanding is that the siddurim of the geonim were meant to be strictly what was required by the \anshei knesses hagedola. In fact, I Rav Pappa's conclusion is "we don't know the minhag so let's do all of it". He doesn't even have pesukei d'zimra for which there are brachos made. – Yitzchak Oct 29 '13 at 1:55
  • i thought it was more like something a long the lines of what rambam had in mind. even though the rambam brings the nosa7 of the modheem darabbonon, he explicitly says it is a 7illul hashem to daven the way people davened back then(forget bout now), therefore he did away with the repetition of the second 3amidho. and from this we see that we dont have a second 3amidho therefore no modheem darabbonon. so maybe rasaj was making his nosa7 with intention of it being used for only one 3amidho, the silent one? i havent looked into his siddur so i am not so sure but maybe an idea... – MoriDowidhYa3aqov Oct 29 '13 at 3:38
  • Read Hilkhos tefillah where he discusses chazaras hashatz. RaMBaM abolished the chazara in his synagogue because of talking. I don't think any rishon was against the chazara altogether. – Yitzchak Oct 29 '13 at 15:08
  • 1
    I hear your point but I don't think it's what RaMBaM says in the letter. Also, I don't think most people here are familiar with the Arabic number-for-letter transliteration conventions so more of the community might understand you if you used ashkenazi transliteration. – Yitzchak Oct 30 '13 at 13:13

You must log in to answer this question.