Daf Ditty Pesachim 118: Hallel Ha-Gadol

Psalm 117, f. 21r in Passover Haggadah, with ritual instructions in French

(Bouton Haggadah) Zürich, Braginsky Collection, B315

Expanses, expanses,
Expanses divine my soul craves.

Confine me not in cages,

Of substance or of spirit.
My soul soars the expanses of the heavens.

Walls of heart and walls of deed

Will not contain it.

Morality, logic, custom -

My soul soars above these,
Above all that bears a name,

1
Above all that is exalted and ethereal.

I am love-sick -
I thirst, I thirst for God,
As a deer for water brooks.

Rav Kook, Chadarav, p. 391

They pour for him the third cup and he says grace after his meal. The fourth, and he concludes
on it the Hallel and says on it the Blessing of the Song. Between these cups he may drink if he
chooses, but between the third and the fourth he should not drink.

Rabbi Simchah Roth writes:2

1:
In the Gemara [Pesachim 117b] we are told that each of the four cups of wine during the Seder is
designated for a certain mitzvah. The first is for Kiddush, the second is for the 'telling' (the
'haggadah'), the third is for Grace After Meals, and the fourth is for the Hallel.

2:
In the Gemara [Pesachim 118a] a baraita is quoted:

On the fourth [cup] he concludes the Hallel and recites the Great Hallel...
The Great Hallel is then identified as Psalm 136, which includes the phrase 'for His kindness is
everlasting' twenty-six times. (This is the view of Rabbi Tarfon, which is accepted; another view
is also quoted in the baraita according to which the Great Hallel is Psalm 23.) More than one reason
is offered for the inclusion of Psalm 136; the most appealing is probably that offered by Rabbi
Yoĥanan: because God sits in his highest heaven and allocates food for each creature. This is God's
supreme act of kindness. The connection between Pesaĥ and the food supply is possibly to be
found in a mishnah which we studied in Tractate Rosh ha-Shanah [1:2]: -
On four occasions the world is judged: on Pesaĥ regarding grain; on Shavuot regarding the fruit
of trees; on Rosh ha-Shanah all mankind passes muster before Him ... and on Sukkot we are judged
regarding water.
In the ancient economy the grain supply was the equivalent of the food supply.

1
http://www.ravkooktorah.org/ind_psal.htm
2
http://www.bmv.org.il/shiurim/pesachim/pes10.html

2
3:
In the Gemara [Pesachim 118a] the identity of 'the Blessing of the Song' is also disputed. The
Amora of Eretz-Israel, Rabbi Yoĥanan, says that 'the Blessing of the Song' [Birkat ha-Shir] is the
passage that we have in our prayer-books today as the conclusion of 'Pesukei de-Zimra' on Shabbat
and Yom Tov, 'Nishmat'. The Babylonian Amora, Rav Yehudah, says that Birkat ha-Shir is the
blessing that concludes Hallel in our contemporary prayer-books as well. Rather than deciding
between the two views, it is established custom nowadays to say both passages, the first after the
second.

4:
Our mishnah also states that one should not drink more wine between the third and fourth cups,
even though this is permitted between the first and the second and between the second and the
third. The Talmud of Eretz-Israel [Pesachim 71a] says that this is to prevent one getting drunk on
too much wine (or becoming drowsy). To counter the possible argument that there is no greater
reason to fear either eventuality from the wine between the third and fourth cups than that between
any of the others, the Gemara there also says that 'wine which comes after the meal can make one
drunk; wine which is a part of the meal will not do so'. I do not know whether there is a factual
justification for this claim.

3
MISHNA: They poured for the leader of the seder the third cup of wine, and he recites the
blessing over his food, Grace After Meals. Next, they pour him the fourth cup. He completes
hallel over it, as he already recited the first part of hallel before the meal. And he also recites the
blessing of the song at the end of hallel over the fourth cup. During the period between these
cups, i.e., the first three cups established by the Sages, if one wishes to drink more, he may drink;
however, between the third cup and the fourth cup one should not drink.

GEMARA: Ran Ḥanan said to Rava: Since the mishna states that Grace After Meals must be
recited over the third cup, learn from it that Grace After Meals requires a cup of wine. Rava said
to him: This is no proof, for although the Sages instituted the drinking of four cups in the
manner of freedom, once the four cups are in place, with each and every one of them we will
perform a mitzva, despite the fact that they were not originally instituted for this purpose. After
the Sages instituted these four cups, they attached a special mitzva to each one. However, this does
not prove that there is an obligation to recite Grace After Meals over a cup of wine during the rest
of the year.

We learned in the mishna that they pour the leader of the seder the fourth cup and he complete
hallel over it, and he recites the blessing of the song at the end of hallel over that cup.

The Gemara asks: What is the blessing of the song mentioned in the mishna? Rav Yehuda said:
It is the blessing that begins with: They shall praise You, Lord, our God. And Rabbi Yoḥanan
said that one also recites: The breath of all living, a prayer that follows the verses of praise
[Pesukei dezimra]. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to the fourth cup, one completes
hallel over it and recites the great hallel; this is the statement of Rabbi Tarfon. And some say
that one recites: “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want” (Psalms 23:1), in appreciation of
the food he ate at the meal.

4
The Gemara asks: From where does the great hallel begin and where does it end? Rabbi
Yehuda says: From “Give thanks” (Psalms 136:1) until “The rivers of Babylon” (Psalms
137:1). And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: From “A song of ascents” (Psalms 134:1) until “The
rivers of Babylon.” Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From “For the Lord has chosen Jacob for
Himself” (Psalms 135:4) until “The rivers of Babylon.”

The Gemara asks: And why is this section called the great hallel? Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Because
this passage states that the Holy One, blessed be He, sits in the heights of the universe and
dispenses food to every creature. The whole world praises God for His kindness through the
great hallel, which includes the verse: “Who gives food to all flesh” (Psalms 136:25).

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: These twenty-six mentions of the word hodu, give praise, in
this hallel (Psalms 136), to what do they correspond? He explains: They correspond to the
twenty-six generations that the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world, and to whom
He did not give the Torah. There were ten generations from Adam to Noah, another ten from
Noah to Abraham, and six generations from Abraham to Moses and the revelation at Sinai, i.e.,
Isaac, Jacob, Levi, Kehat, Amram, and Moses. And why did these generations survive, despite the
fact that they did not learn Torah or perform mitzvot? They survived only because God sustained
them through His mercy, even though they were undeserving.

5
With regard to the praise due to God for sustaining the world, the Gemara cites a statement that
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The task of providing a person’s food is twice as difficult as the suffering
endured by a woman in childbirth. While, with regard to a woman in childbirth, it is written:
“In pain [be’etzev] you shall bring forth children” (Genesis 3:16), with regard to food, it is
written: “In toil [be’itzavon] you shall eat of it, all the days of your life” (Genesis 3:17). Itzavon
is a superlative form of etzev, which indicates that it is more difficult to support oneself than to
give birth.

ALL NATIONS PRAISE HASHEM

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:3

The verse says, "All of the nations shall praise Hashem... for He has shown His abundant kindness
to us" (Tehilim 117). The Gemara asks why the nations thank Hashem if He showed His kindness
to us. It answers that the verse means that the nations should thank Hashem for the wonders that
He did with them, and certainly we must thank Hashem for the wonders that He did for us, because
with us He has been extra benevolent.

What does the Gemara mean? What kindness did Hashem do for the nations that obligates them
to praise Him?

RASHBAM (DH a'Gevuros) explains that Hashem constantly does wonders for the world at large.
All people throughout the world benefit from Hashem's kindness, as He provides them with
sustenance, life, and all of the marvelous elements of the world that provide them with their needs
and give them pleasure. Since they benefit, they should also thank Hashem. How much more so
must we thank Hashem, for His kindnesses to us are abundant.

RASHI says that the nations should thank Hashem because they saw that Hashem did great
wonders for the Jewish people. The MAHARSHA, however, points out that the wonders of
Hashem were done in order to save Yisrael from the evil plans of the nations. Why, then, should
the nations thank Hashem for those wonders?

The BRISKER RAV (Chidushei ha'Griz Al ha'Torah, Tehilim 117) explains that there are two
types of blessings that can be recited on a miracle. The first type is a "Birkas Hoda'ah," a blessing
of thanksgiving, which is said by the beneficiary of the miracle in order to thank Hashem for what

3
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/pesachim/insites/ps-dt-118.htma

6
he has been given. The second type is a "Birkas ha'Shevach," a blessing of praise. Even a person
who did not directly benefit from the miracle should say a "Birkas ha'Shevach," a blessing of
praise, when he sees something awe-inspiring. For example, one who sees lightning, or an
exceptionally beautiful natural wonder should recite this blessing.

The nations are required to recite this second type of blessing, a Birkas ha'Shevach. That is what
the verse means when it says, "Halelu Es Hashem Kol Goyim." The Gemara says that how much
more so must we bless Hashem, because besides the blessing of praise at the awe-inspiring miracle,
the Jewish people are also obligated to recite a Birkas Hoda'ah, for they are the direct beneficiaries
of that miracle.

Praising God
Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:4

Aside from the standard Hallel (Tehillim 113-118) that is recited during the seder, we also are
instructed by the baraita on our daf to say Hallel ha-Gadol. Although there is a disagreement
recorded in the Gemara regarding which psalms make up Hallel ha-Gadol, we follow the opinion
of Rabbi Yehuda who says that it is the whole of Tehillim 136.

Tehillim 136 encompasses 26 praises of God from the time of creation through the Jewish People
entering the Land of Israel. Having introduced Hallel ha-Gadol as part of the praise said during
the seder, the question is raised why we usually choose to recite the standard Hallel instead. The
Gemara points out five unique areas that are focused on in the standard Hallel which make it
appropriate:

1. Exodus from Egypt (114:1)

2. Splitting of the Red Sea (114:3)
3. Giving of the Torah (114:4)
4. Resurrecting the dead (116:9)
5. The pangs of the Messiah (115:1)

The discussion of Hallel leads to further aggadic discussions of these chapters in Tehillim,
concluding with a number of teachings that Rabbi Yishmael b’Rabbi Yosei quoted in the name of
his father. One of them was an analysis of Tehillim 117, which describes how all the nations of the
world praise God because of what He did on behalf of the Jewish people. The question is obvious
– why should the nations of the world praise God because of what he did for us? Rabbi Yosei
taught that the intention of the passage is to say that we should watch the nations of the world
praise God when He does something for them and learn how much we are obligated to praise Him
since His generosity to us was even greater.

Rabbi Yosei’s teachings about related issues are also brought in the Gemara. Based on the passage
in Tehillim (68:30) we see that, in the future, Egypt will want to bring an offering to the Messiah,
who is not sure whether to accept it from them. God commands (68:32) him to accept it in
4
https://steinsaltz.org/daf/pesahim118/

7
recognition of the fact that the Jewish people lived peacefully in Egypt for many years before
slavery began.

Seeing this, Kush also expresses a desire to bring an offering to the Messiah (ibid), and again, God
commands him to accept it.

Rome, on the other hand (68:31) wants to join the show of respect, as well. God rejects their
request, however. Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba quotes Rabbi Yohanan as explaining the passage to mean
that the offering of wild bulls (Rome), whose actions are all written in one quill, cannot be
accepted.

Rashi and the Rashbam understand the reference to a single quill as meaning that they always
intend evil for the Jewish people. Some of the Ge’onim explain this expression to mean that the
activities of this nation can be summed up in a clear, straightforward manner. Others explain that
every nation has two angels, one of whom records the positive attributes of the nation, while the
other records all of its negative attributes. Rome is described as having only one angel – the evil
one – writing down its history.

Our Daf teaches a lesson about the difficulty of earning a living from the fact that the verse
regarding sustenance in Tehillim 136 is situated next to the verse which discusses the splitting of
the Yam Suf.5

Maharsha notes that, notwithstanding, these verses are not adjacent one to the other. The verse of
splitting the waters of the Yam Suf is verse 13, while the verse which refers to our daily bread is
verse 25. If the Gemara means to associate these two verses simply due to their being in the same
chapter, then the lesson could have pointed out that the difficulty of maintaining one’s livelihood
is comparable to any of the miracles mentioned in the chapter, such as Creation itself, or like the
miracle of the death of the first-born in Egypt.

What is the meaning of the connection between earning a living and the splitting of the waters
of the Yam Suf?

‫ מנוח חכמת‬explains that there is a series of verses at the beginning of this chapter of Tehillim which
lists natural occurrences, such as “He made the Heavens with understanding...He spread the earth
upon the waters...He made great luminaries...the sun...the moon, etc.” Later, the chapter highlights
overt miracles and supernatural events. Accordingly, the verse which tells of Hashem providing
food for all creatures should have been in the earlier part of the chapter, together with the natural
events.

Why does it appear much later, among the supernatural events?

5
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Pesachim%20118.pdf

8
It is to teach that providing provisions for all creatures is not a simple thing, but it is a great miracle,
just like the splitting of the Yam Suf.

Rav Yehoshua of Ostrovo, zt”l, asks the obvious question: How could we say that securing a
person’s livelihood is as difficult for Hashem as splitting the sea? Could it be that splitting the sea
was a chore for Hashem?

Rather, if a person sees that he is having a hard time making a living, he should focus on the fact
that according to the natural order, it would have been impossible to split the sea—it was faith and
trust in Hashem alone that resulted in its being split. The same is true of one’s livelihood. If a
person would only trust completely in Hashem, his needs would certainly be met.

Reb Leibel Glazer, a chossid of the Sfas Emes, zt”l, of Ger was once in difficult straits. He had sat
and learned a few years after his wedding according to the terms of the wedding agreement, fully
supported by his father-in-law. Eventually the agreed upon time passed, and he was forced to seek
a livelihood to support his growing family. Even so, he refused to dedicate more than four hours a
day to business so that the rest of his time could be devoted to Torah study and avodas Hashem.
As his family grew, however, it seemed as though he would need to spend more time in business.

At that point, the Sfas Emes passed away and Reb Leibel approached his successor, the Imrei
Emes, zt”l, for advice instead. After explaining his situation at length, he submitted his question.
“Rebbe, I think that I really have no choice in the matter. Do I or do I not need to devote more of
my day to business?” The Rebbe listened patiently to Reb Leibel’s story, but when it came to a
response, he answered with lightning quickness. “Maybe yes, maybe no — but what does your
having to work more or not have to do with decreasing the time set aside for your learning?

What has the Gemara done to deserve getting shortchanged like that?” The chossid took this as a
clear answer… and he cut back his time at business to two hours a day.

Rachel Scheinerman writes:6

The discussion on today’s page — animated by a mishnah about the 3rd and 4th cups of wine,
Grace After Meals, and the recitation of Hallel (a sequence of psalms recited at the Passover meal
and on other occasions) — is crammed with amazing midrashim (biblical interpretations) on the
verses of Hallel. My favorite is probably the one in which Rav Huna teaches that the Israelites
rebelled against Moses even as they were crossing the Red Sea. Apparently ten terrifying
supernatural plagues plus a split sea wasn’t enough proof of God’s power and intention. So God
commanded the fish of the Red Sea to spit the drowned Egyptians back out onto dry land because

6
Myjewishlearning.com

9
the Israelites needed to see the corpses of their enemies to be convinced of God’s might and
goodness. It’s poignant, bizarre, morbid and an incredible interpretation of key Torah verses.
Check it out here.

But I’m going to draw our attention to a different midrash today. On the first side of the page, the
rabbis explore the idea, found in Hallel, that God sustains the world. This leads to a meditation on
the challenges of feeding oneself and one’s family. This was a tough thing to do in antiquity;
people had to scratch their living out of the dirt without the benefit of modern agricultural
techniques, and were subject to the whims of weather and other natural disasters. Listen to the
rabbis describe how hard it is:

Rabbi Yohanan said: The task of providing a person’s food is twice as difficult as the
suffering endured by a woman in childbirth. While, with regard to a woman in childbirth, it
is written: “Toiling (be’etzev) you shall bring forth children” (Genesis 3:16), with regard to
food, it is written: “In toil (be’itzavon) you shall eat of it, all the days of your life” (Genesis
3:17).

Umm … really? Let me first explain how the midrash works, then we’ll get back to the claim it
makes.

Both verses come from the chapter in Genesis in which Adam and Eveare kicked out of the Garden
of Eden and given the bad news that life will now be hard. Eve will suffer in childbirth; Adam will
suffer to cultivate the land. The Hebrew word used for the pain or toil each will experience is
essentially the same, etzev. But, says Rabbi Yohanan, the grammatical form of the word in the
verse applied to Adam implies that his pain is greater — twice as great.

It is no secret that the Talmud is male-oriented. But I can’t help but chuckle (or grimace, depending
on my mood) at the idea that farming is more painful than childbirth. I’ve never farmed, but I’ve
done the latter three times. Even with the support of modern medicine, it’s a doozy — though the
results are adorable.

As a modern female reader of Talmud, I find myself often moved by the thoughtful empathy of
the rabbis and their emotional depth and vulnerability — traits not always considered “masculine”
by our current culture, to its detriment. And I am also sometimes dismayed by their myopia,
especially with regard to women.

Reading this midrash in its full context helps a bit. The rabbis go on to assert that the task of
providing food for a family is not only more painful than giving birth but also more difficult than
splitting the Red Sea and redeeming a people. They don’t just toil more than women — they toil
more than God?

There’s one more surprising turn in this unlikely set of midrashim:

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: A person’s orifices (when he cannot properly relieve himself)
are as difficult for him as the day of death and the splitting of the Red Sea, as it is stated:
“He who is bent down shall speedily be loosed; and he shall not go down dying into the pit,

10
neither shall his bread fail” (Isaiah 51:14). And afterward it is written: “Who stirs up the sea,
that its waves roar” (Isaiah 51:15) (implying a comparison between the first concern and the
splitting of the sea).

It turns out that there is one thing even more difficult than childbirth, splitting the Red Sea,
redemption and even feeding a family: struggling with a bodily orifice that will not open at the
opportune moment. That is like death.

Are they serious? Or have we just been punked? Too bad Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya isn’t here to
tell us.

The Faith of Financial Sanctity

Rav Binyamin Zimmerman writes:7

Bein Adam Le-chavero: Ethics of Interpersonal Conduct

Integrity and Faith

We have noted previously that honesty and integrity in business are heavily rooted in faith
in God. This is a primary reason for the severity of the crime of swearing falsely to illegally retain
money, and also explains the connection between the use of false measures to cheat in business
and God’s taking the Jewish people out of Egypt, which is recalled in the mitzva of exact measures.
This dynamic also shows how the mitzva of exact weights is related to remembering Amalek’s
attack on the Jewish people, which we are commanded to remember in Devarim following the
verses on proper weights and measures.

The connection between financial honesty and faith is not a novel one, and the two are in
fact deeply connected. In this lesson we will develop a framework for understanding this
connection; in the next lesson we will demonstrate how Chapter 19 of Vayikra is fundamentally
characterized by the concept of faith, which is inextricably bound with that chapter’s theme of
holiness.

7
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/shiur-29-faith-financial-sanctity

11
The First Question

The Gemara (Shabbat 31a) details six questions that a person is asked by the heavenly
court after his departure from this world, the first of which is pertinent to our discussion:

At the time a person is brought [before the heavenly court] to be judged, they [i.e. the
judges] ask him whether he conducted his business affairs faithfully, set aside regular times
for Torah study, observed the commandment to have children, looked forward to the time
of the redemption …

The first question is both interesting and enlightening. In its simple sense, the question asks
whether the person was honest in his business dealings, but the unusual use of the word “faith”
clearly indicates that something additional is at hand. Taking this diction into account, we might
render the question as: Did you conduct your business transactions with a sense of God’s
involvement in the world? One who does so surely understands that dishonesty in business is not
an option.

The Gemara’s formulation of the question, then, reiterates our point in previous lessons
that business without faith is a recipe for ethical disaster. However, before we further explore the
relationship of faith and honest business practices, what is it?

The Hebrew word used here – emuna – is generally translated as “belief” or “faith,” but
neither of these words does justice to the term. Both of the English words imply some degree of
uncertainty and are limited to a person’s mindset. It therefore behooves us to gain a better
understanding of this concept, and to see how essential a role it plays in promoting ethical behavior.

Emuna: A Definition

Aside from related verb forms, the Torah uses the word emuna twice, and in neither context
does a definition of “belief” or “faith” seem appropriate. One instance is in a verse (Devarim 32:4)
that describes God as a “God of emuna and without iniquity.” What could it possibly mean to be
a God of belief or faith?

12
 Perhaps one could find a way to excuse one of those translations in that verse, but this does
not appear possible in the verse that describes the placement of Moshe’s hands during the same
fateful battle with Amalek mentioned above. As the people at the foot of the hill waged battle
against Amalek, Moshe stood atop it with his hands raised to ensure that they keep their hearts
committed to God while fighting.

It came to pass that when Moshe held up his hand, Israel prevailed, and when he let down
his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moshe’s hands were heavy; they took a stone and put it
under him, and he sat on it, and Aharon and Chur supported his hands, one on this side
and one on that side, and his hands were emuna until sunset. (Shemot 17:11–12)

Moshe’s hands, held up during the battle, are described as emuna. Can a person’s hands be belief
or faith?

Beyond the difficulties with the common translations used for this word, it is not as clear
as one might think that the Torah requires man to have emuna. Rambam begins his magnum
opus, Mishneh Torah, with the mitzva of knowing (la-da’at) God, rather than using the
term emuna. However, in works that Rambam originally wrote in Judaeo-Arabic, such as his Sefer
Ha-mitzvot and his commentary to the Mishna, he uses an Arabic term that for centuries was
consistently rendered as emuna. This leaves the question of whether the mitzva demands emuna,
often understood as belief or faith in God, or requires knowledge of God.

This problem is compounded by challenges by Ramban (Hassagot Le-sefer Ha-

mitzvot, aseh 1) and Rav Yitzchak Abarbanel (Rosh Amana). They question
whether emuna should be considered a mitzva altogether. Second, since belief in God does not
seem to involve any action, but is a state of mind, how could it be required? Presumably one either
has it or does not.

Rav Michael Rosensweig summarizes some of the issues raised as follows:

The Rambam (Hilkhot Yesodei Ha-Torah 1:1) opens his magnum opus, the Mishneh
Torah, by articulating the obligation to know (leida) Hashem’s existence. In his Sefer Ha-
mitzvot and in his enumeration of the Thirteen Tenets of Faith (Peirush Ha-mishnayot,

13
 Introduction to Perek Cheilek), he apparently formulates this central principle somewhat
differently, accenting belief (le-ha’amin) instead of knowledge.

Rav Rosensweig provides an explanation based on a translation posited by Rav Chaim Heller:

R. Hayyim Heller (Sefer Ha-mitzvot, aseh 1) posits that there is no discrepancy between
the various sources, as the original Arabic term employed in Sefer Ha-mitzvot may connote
either knowledge or belief. While this may resolve the potential conflict between Mishneh
Torah and Sefer Ha-mitzvot, it does not address the context of the Thirteen Principles of
Faith, which surely emphasizes belief.

We may suggest based on R. Hayyim Heller’s insight that the Rambam in all contexts
demands a particularly rigorous standard of emuna that transcends the conventional
definition of either knowledge or belief. Emuna conveys both affirmation and deep-seated
conviction – amen –- as well as unshakeable loyalty, trust, and reliance – ne’emanut (see
Rabbeinu Bachya, Kad Ha-kemach, Emuna). Intellectual awareness or even reasoned
demonstration of Divine existence is insufficient if it is unaccompanied by unswerving
dedication and commitment to the Divine Will. Superficial or uncritical belief that is not
rooted in inquiry and introspection and that does not inspire one to channel all of one’s
faculties to manifest Hashem’s presence (“kol atzmotai tomarna Hashem mi kamokha”) is
also inadequate. In Sefer Ha-mitzvot, the Rambam utilizes an intentionally ambiguous term
in order to convey both cognizance and belief in a maximal and integrated manner. In fact,
the Ramban (Shemot 20:2) explicitly requires both knowledge and belief (she-yeide’u ve-
sheya’aminu). The knowledge-belief implicit in this mitzva must redefine man’s purpose.
(“Avraham Avinu and the Concept of Emunah”)[1]

Unassailable Knowledge

We might add two points to Rav Rosensweig’s formulation. First, the contradiction
between the two terms emuna and yedi’a is not an outright contradiction as is often presumed, in
large part because these terms do not necessarily mean what we might have thought.

It is clear from Biblical usage that the term yedi’a not only connotes intellectual
knowledge, but also has the sense of an intense connection, as in: “Adam again knew (va-yeida)

14
his wife, and she bore a son” (Bereishit 4:25). Rambam’s mitzva of knowing God requires a level
of knowledge and understanding that leads to intimacy and a feeling of intimate connection with
God (see Year 1, Lesson 23, where we discussed knowledge of God at great length).

This rendering of yedi’a may further distance us from the usual understanding
of emuna, but as we have already pointed out, it is untenable in the Biblical context to
define emuna as “faith” or “belief.” In fact, emuna is far beyond intimate knowledge.

Knowledge may be forgotten or disproven, and therefore knowledge retains its power only
while it is retained and remains pure. Emuna, though, is nothing less than the state of being
steadfast and unwavering, with certainty of action or thought so intimate and true that one realizes
that nothing whatsoever can overcome it. Moshe’s hands were emuna in that they were
unwavering and steadfast as he held them high so that the people could see and remember that
only through commitment to God could they achieve victory over Amalek (Rosh Ha-shana 29a).

The foundation of all foundations and the pillar of wisdom is to know that there is a
Primary Being who brought into being all existence. All the beings of the heavens, the
earth, and what is between them came into existence only from the truth of His being

If, theoretically, He did not exist, no other being could possibly exist.

If, theoretically, none of the entities aside from Him existed, He alone would continue to
exist, and their non-existence would not void His existence, because all the [other] entities
require Him and He, blessed is He, does not require them or any one of them. Therefore
the truth of His [being] does not resemble the truth of any of their [beings]

This is implied by the prophet’s statement, “And the Lord God is true” (Yirmeyahu 10:10),
i.e. He alone is true and no other entity possesses truth that compares to His truth. This is
[the meaning of] the Torah’s statement, “There is nothing else aside from
Him” (Devarim 4:35), i.e. there is no true existence like His aside from Him. (Hilkhot
Yesodei Ha-Torah 1:1–4)
Similarly, Hashem is the God of emuna in that his existence is the only true and unchanging
existence in the universe, because unlike all other entities, His existence is independent of other
factors. This is expressed in Rambam’s description of the mitzva of knowing God:

15
 While faith and belief may not require any action, study and action are required to raise
one’s awareness of God to the level of intimate knowledge where one can remain steadfast in
commitment to God even amid trial and tribulation.

Rav Elchanan Wasserman (Kovetz Ma’amarim) goes further. He argues that the mitzva
of emuna cannot be to know or believe in God’s existence, because anyone with an open mind
who looks at the magnificence of the world cannot state with any degree of conviction that the
world came to into being by accident. Especially in our day, when scientific demonstration of the
complexity of the world and humanity has transformed avowed atheists into believers,[2] there need
be no commandment merely to believe in or to know of God.

Rather, Rav Elchanan explains, the mitzva is to remove the impediments that may cause
one to question his emuna. After all, if there is a Creator and He recorded His will in the Torah,
then there are obligations that follow. These obligations often lead to cognitive dissonance in
individuals who find it easier to deny the existence of God than to accept their knowledge of His
existence and fulfill His will.

The mitzva of emuna requires raising one’s passive knowledge of God to an active state of
intimacy, where no impediment or desire can raise any doubt amidst one’s steadfast awareness and
unwavering certainty of God’s presence. One who has attained this state not only is excited to
fulfill God’s mitzvot, viewing them as a great opportunity rather than a burden, but is captivated
by the knowledge that the world has a purpose and there is a reason for existence.

Rav Kook (Olat Ra’aya) writes that this is the basis of the terminology, Ani ma’amin be-
emuna sheleima), generally translated roughly as “I believe with perfect belief …” It is not
sufficient merely to have emuna; rather, one must have complete emuna. Rav Kook explains that
basic knowledge of God – which any child can attain – is insufficient; rather, the mitzva requires
cultivating awareness and understanding of who God is. (This is, in fact, the agenda of Rambam’s
Thirteen Principles of Faith: explaining who God is and how He runs the world.) We start with a
certain level of emuna, but we must develop it toward emuna sheleima, complete steadfastness,
until it becomes part and parcel of every aspect of our personality and behavior.

16
Emuna and Business

A person with ingrained emuna senses God at all times, but is particularly aware of His
presence when doing business. The impulses that come into play when money is at stake are often
blinding, and lead many who would otherwise be upstanding individuals to petty white collar
crimes or worse. The lesson of Parashat Kedoshim, as well as the Gemara’s description of the first
question the recently deceased is asked, shows clearly that anyone involved in fraud or other
disingenuous business practices completely lacks emuna. Faithful business conduct is so important
that it tops the list of questions, and one who is a ma’amin – who has emuna – constantly works to
raise his awareness of God and does business with utmost integrity. A person who is not
upstanding in his business practices, however, is known as mechussar amana –
lacking emuna (Bava Metzi’a 48a). Study of the Torah’s monetary laws is thus of utmost
importance.

A story is told of a ritual slaughterer who came to the Chafetz Chaim and said that he was
unable to sleep at night because he constantly second-guessed himself as to whether he had
slaughtered properly. Therefore, the slaughterer noted, he was going to switch professions. Asked
by the Chafetz Chaim what he intended to do instead, he replied that he had decided to go into
business.

The Chafetz Chaim, taken aback, said that he must not have understood the slaughterer
properly.

“How many chapters of the Shulchan Arukh,” he proceeded to ask the retiring slaughterer,
“deal with the laws of ritual slaughter?”

The slaughterer, who knew his trade well, responded without delay, “Twenty-eight.”

“Correct,” replied the Chafetz Chaim, “but now let me ask you, how many chapters of
the Shulchan Arukh deal with monetary law necessary for running a business in line with Torah
values and laws?”

To this question the slaughterer did not have such a quick answer. All he could say was,
“A lot, I guess a lot more.”

17
 Continued the Chafetz Chaim, “If you have trouble sleeping at night because you wonder
whether you may have erred in of the five matters that can invalidate ritual slaughter, with which
you are familiar, why do you imagine that you will be able to sleep peacefully in the world of
business and not violate any of the laws with which you are completely unfamiliar?”

This exchange is illustrative of a prevailing understanding that to be a Jewish businessman

involves little more than using one’s God-given mind. However, the Torah issues a series of
demanding mitzvot for the businessman with which he must maintain and build his ethics and
integrity, working through emuna toward a life of interpersonal holiness.

Rambam (Hilkhot Dei’ot 5:13) explains how a Torah scholar’s business dealings truly
express honesty and integrity:

The commercial conduct of the talmid chakham must be truthful and faithful. His “yes”
must be “yes” and his “no,” “no.” He forces himself to be exact in calculations when he
is paying but is willing to be lenient when others are his debtors. One is not to buy on credit
when he has the wherewithal to pay cash, nor should one be a guarantor for a loan [thus
becoming involved in others’ potential conflicts] or serve as a representative to collect
others. He should fulfill his obligations in commerce, even where the law allows him to
withdraw or retract, so that his word is his bond, but if others have obligations to him, he
should deal mercifully, forgiving and extending credit. One should be careful not to deprive
his neighbor of his livelihood [even where this is legal] or cause hardship and anguish to
others. One who does all these things is the one regarding whom Scripture says, “You are
My [i.e. God’s] servant, Israel, in whom I glory” (Yeshayahu 49:3).

It is with good reason that the Gemara (Yoma 86a) says that one who sees the honest business
practices and fine dealings of a Torah scholar will praise those who study Torah, come to love
God, and want his children to study and live a life of Torah.

Emuna and Income Allotment

Especially with regard to income, there are numerous sources indicating that God is
directly involved with everyone’s wealth.

18
 The Gemara (Ta’anit 2a–b) states that there are three keys that God never permanently
places in the hands of an angel or other agent. One of these keys is the key to livelihood. This was
readily apparent to the Jews in the desert, who received manna from Heaven, and though it less
evident in our day and age, it is still God who determines an individual’s income and livelihood.

Elsewhere (Beitza 16a) the Gemara states that one’s income is fixed by God with the
exception of funds used for certain mitzvot:

A person’s entire income is determined on Rosh Ha-shana and confirmed on Yom Kippur,
with the exception of expenses for Shabbat and holidays, and the expenses for one’s
children’s education. With respect to them, if one spends less, he is allowed less, and if he
spends more, he is allowed more.

Similarly, the central verse in Ashrei (Psalm 145), recited thrice daily, is, “You open up
your hand and satiate all alive with favor” (verse 16). Psalm 136 is known as the Great Hallel
(hallel ha-gadol) because of the verse, “He gives food to all flesh, for his kindness is
forever” (Pesachim 118).

Midrash Rabba and Midrash Tanchuma state that “earning a livelihood is greater than
redemption.” In explaining this declaration, Rav Shimon Schwab (The Ethical Imperative, p. 29)
notes that man’s livelihood comes directly from God, rather than through an intermediary, while
redemption comes through God’s agent. Therefore, when one receives a job or earns money, he
experiences a direct encounter with God. Work is a means of forging a deep, long-lasting
connection with God, by recognizing His hand in human sustenance and wealth.

Of course, if this recognition is to be real, it must affect how one’s behavior and attitude
toward money. One who truly possesses emuna will be truthful in all his endeavors, particularly
monetary matters. Many honest, hardworking individuals have thus come to view their hard-
earned income as sacred shekels – holy money – because they know that it really is their own.

Many individuals who are involved with shady business practices appear to grow wealthy
as their bank accounts expand, but they are rarely satisfied with their earnings. They are not truly
wealthy. As the Mishna says, “Who is wealthy? He who is happy with his lot” (Avot 4:1). This

19
happiness can come only from divinely ordained wealth. “It is the blessing of the Lord that
enriches” (Mishlei 10:22).

By the same token, in discussing a certain disputed business practice that would facilitate
retention of money erroneously left in one’s possession due to a non-Jew’s error, Be’eir Ha-gola
(266) writes:

I am writing this down for future generations, for I have seen many who have become
wealthy through errors that gentiles have made. But I have also seen how they have lost
their money again, and have left nothing for their heirs, as is recorded in Sefer Chasidim.
Those who sanctified God’s name by returning gains made through the error of others
became wealthy and left much of their riches to their children.

Rav Herschel Schachter summarizes succinctly:

Included in emuna is belief in hashgacha peratit (divine providence). Chazal (Chullin 7b)
tell us that “no one hurts his finger in this world if such was not ordained from above” and
“no one can touch anything that was intended for someone else” (Yoma 38b.) Records are
kept in Heaven on all people, and everyone will get what he deserves. We have emuna that
whatever will happen to me is the will of Hashem. Whether I survive or not is up to ha-
kadosh barukh hu, and I cannot possibly suffer if this is not the wish of Hashem.

Bitachon requires that we act in accordance with our emuna, i.e., in accordance with this
principle of faith that there is hashgacha peratit. While one must engage in hishtadlut, he
should not fall to pieces considering the possibility that he may accidentally (i.e. not in
accordance with the divine will) die, etc. The outcome of all situations is dictated by the
will of Hashem, and everything Hashem does is ultimately le-tov (for the good).

Righteousness and Emuna

Our forefather Avraham forged a relationship with God based on his commitment
to tzedek (generally rendered as “righteousness”) and justice. The Chafetz Chaim, in his
introduction to Ahavat Chesed, observes that at first glance, these two terms appear contradictory.
Justice involves doing things correctly, in keeping with the law, while tzedek involves yielding to

20
somebody else’s needs beyond the requirements of the law. He explains that Avraham’s legacy
was that in obligations to others, one should follow justice and adhere to the letter of the law,
ensuring that those others receive their due. However, in addressing others’ obligations, one should
implement tzedaka by being generous and not insisting on receiving all to which he is entitled.

What is the root of this tzedaka? The Gemara (Makkot 24a) finds that the most
comprehensive overarching expression of the principles of the Torah is found in the words, “a
righteous man lives by his emuna” (Chavakkuk 2:4). If one is truly to follow Avraham’s legacy of
kindness and compassion, he must be driven by Avraham’s emuna: unwavering, steadfast
commitment to a life characterized by an intimate connection with God, expressed in fulfillment
of the business practices required by the Torah and a commitment to interpersonal holiness.

[1]
TorahWeb Foundation 2008 <http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2008/parsha/rros_lechlecha.html>.
[2]
See, e.g., Associated Press, “Famous Atheist Now Believes in God” (December 9, 2004)

<http://www.simpletoremember.com/articles/a/atheist-believes-in-god/>.

About Hallel8

Origins

Hallel is a prayer of praise and thanksgiving, made up of Tehillim 113-118. Although Sefer
Tehillim is attributed to David ha-melech, our sages suggest a number of possibilities for who first
recited some form of a Hallel prayer,[1] starting with Moshe Rabbeinu and benei Yisrael at the
sea.[2]

In each situation mentioned, the Jewish people face an existential threat and recite Hallel as a
prayer for God's deliverance. Without resolving the question of who originally recited Hallel, the
Talmud explains that Hallel eventually became a formal enactment.

Pesachim 117a

8
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/hallel-0

21
The Sages said: The prophets among them established that Israel should recite it [Hallel] at every
season, and upon every trouble that does not come upon them [a euphemism for the reverse], then
when they are redeemed, they recite it upon their redemption.

In practice, there are two grounds for reciting Hallel: First, to mark specific seasons, such as festive
days outlined by the Torah. Second, following miraculous redemption of the Jewish
people[3] from “every trouble.”[4]

Days of Hallel

The Talmud lists the festive days on which we recite a full Hallel:

Arachin 10a

Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: An individual recites the
complete Hallel on 18 days [throughout the year] - the eight days of Chag [Sukkot and Shemini
Atzeret], eight days of Chanuka, the first festive day of Pesach, and the festival
of Atzeret (Shavuot). And in the diaspora, 21 days - the nine days of Chag, eight days of Chanuka,
the first two festive days of Pesach, and the two festive days of Atzeret.

Why recite a full Hallel on these holidays and not others? The continuation of the passage presents
criteria for determining when to recite Hallel. To be eligible, a day must have a unique sacrifice,
(i.e., not the six last days of Pesach), be called a mo’ed in the Torah (i.e., not Shabbat), be sanctified
by a prohibition on labor (i.e. not Rosh Chodesh), and not be a day on which our very lives are
judged (i.e., not the Days of Awe). Chanuka meets none of these criteria, but is still a day
of Hallel because of the need to express praise and thanks for the miraculous redemption from the
Seleucid Greeks.[5] Halachic authorities who encourage reciting Hallel on Yom Yerushalayim or
Yom Ha-atzma'ut view these days as similarly redemptive.

It's not clear from the Talmud if the obligation to recite Hallel on the days listed is rabbinic[6] or
on a Torah level.[7] Rambam takes the first approach;[8] Ramban disagrees. He argues that
reciting Hallel is a Torah-level mitzva, perhaps derived from the mitzva to rejoice with song on
the festivals when there is a special sacrifice.[9] (As we saw, having a special korban is a criterion
for when we recite Hallel.[10]) Alternatively, since the prophets enacted it, perhaps Hallel belongs
in the halachic category of Divrei Kabbala, matters received from the prophets, which are
sometimes treated like Torah-level mitzvot.[11]

What is Hallel about?

The Talmud lists some of Hallel's more significant themes:

Pesachim 118a

Us, why do we say these [specific Tehillim in Hallel]? Because they include these five things: the
exodus from Egypt, the splitting of the Red Sea, the giving of the Torah, the resurrection of the
dead, and the birthpangs of Mashiach.

22
Hallel begins with a call to praise God, moves on to praise God’s mastery over nature (as
exemplified by the miracles the Talmud lists), next prays for salvation, and then praises and thanks
God for providing it. We end Hallel with an affirmation of faith.

Women's Exemption

Are women obligated to recite the full Hallel? The mishna rules that one man can discharge
another's obligation to recite Hallel.[12] But if a bondsman, woman, or minor, reads Hallel on a
man's behalf, their reading doesn't discharge his obligation. In this case, the man must
repeat Hallel after the reader, word for word.

Mishna Sukka 3:10

One for whom a bondsman or a woman or a minor recites [Hallel]–he repeats what they say after
them.

Rashi explains that this mishna indicates that women, bondsmen and minors are all exempt from
the mitzva of Hallel. Only someone who is obligated in a mitzva can discharge another's
obligation.[13]

Rashi Sukka 38a

They recite it for him – They practiced thus: one would read Hallel and discharge the obligation
for the many. If [the reader] was a slave or woman or minor, since they are not obligated in the
matter, they cannot discharge the obligation of those who are obligated. Therefore, he would
repeat after him [or her, word for word] everything that he said.

Women are exempt from Hallel because it is a positive time-bound mitzva. In practice, though, a
woman may recite Hallel voluntarily. Women who customarily recite berachot over voluntary
mitzva performance recite a beracha over Hallel as well.

Bei'ur Halacha 422 s.v. Hallel

It is further explained in Sukka 38 and in the halachic authorities that women are exempt
from Hallel since it is a positive time-bound mitzva…Know that it is clear that, in any case, she [a
woman] herself can recite Hallel and recite a beracha over it even though she is not obligated, as
with all positive time-bound mitzvot where they [women] are meticulous and recite a beracha.

Women's Obligation

23
Rambam implies that women are exempt from all recitations of Hallel,[14] and Magen Avraham
says so explicitly.

Magen Avraham 422:5

Women are exempt from every Hallel because it is a positive, time-bound commandment.

Tosafot, however, point out that not all Hallels are cut from the same cloth. They rule that
women are obligated in at least one yearly recitation of Hallel, at the Seder, based on the same
halachic principle that includes women in the obligation to drink four cups of wine that night – “af
hen hayu be-oto ha-nes,” “they too were part of that miracle.”

Tosfot Sukka 38a, s.v. mi she-haya

This indicates that a woman is exempt from Hallel on Sukkot and Shavuot, because it is a [positive]
time-bound mitzva. Yet regarding Hallel on Pesach nights, Pesachim 108a indicates that women
are obligated in the four cups [of wine], and presumably the four cups were established
specifically so we could say Hallel and the Hagada over them. Hallel on Pesach is different
because it is on the miracle, and they too [women] were part of that miracle, but here [on other
festivals] it is not recited because of a miracle.

Hallel at the Seder differs significantly from other Hallels.

For example, only Hallel of Seder night is recited at night. Otherwise, the timing for Hallel is in
the daytime, until halachic sunset. Rav Hai Gaon explains that Hallel of Seder night is a song, not
a mere recitation.

Ran Pesachim 26b

But our Rabbi, Hai Gaon z”l, wrote in a responsa that one does not recite a beracha on
the Hallel of the night of Pesach “to complete Hallel” because we do not read it in the mode of
“reading” but rather in the mode of “song” …

Rabbanit Sally Mayer elaborates on what sets this Hallel apart from others:[15]

Rabbanit Sally Mayer "Hallel: The Song of the Seder"

We do not introduce it with a blessing, which would bespeak the formal establishment of a mitzvah,
a commandment, because we are spontaneously reacting to a miracle that has just occurred before
us. We need not stand, we do not have time to go to the synagogue; elated by our good fortune, we
cannot help but sing to thank God for the miracle He has just performed. Even the meal seems in
consonance with this Hallel, as though it is the champagne brought out to celebrate the joy of
victory. The Hallel of the Seder thus reflects the character of the entire holiday of
Passover… Hallel celebrates that moment when we personally leave Egypt...

24
Tosafot's ruling, that women are fully obligated to join in this song of praise and thanks because
of inclusion in the miracle, is widely accepted.[16]

Other Hallels
Other halachic authorities have suggested extending Tosafot's ruling to obligate women in
other Hallels recited for miracles. Rav Raphael Shapiro of Volozhin maintains that women have
an obligation to recite Hallel on the first day of Pesach,[17] and on Chanuka. (See more
on Hallel on Chanuka here.)

Torat Raphael OC 75

On the first Yom Tov of Pesach we also say Hallel because of the miracle and not only because of
Yom Tov…If so, it seems that also on the first day of Pesach women are obligated to
recite Hallel…and likewise on Chanuka they are also obligated since it is because of a miracle.

Rav Ovadya Yosef rules that women whose community follows the practice of
reciting Hallel before the Seder should recite it:

Yechaveh Da'at 5:34

So one can say that, just as men recite Hallel with a beracha on Pesach night before the Seder,
women are also obligated to say it, since it was established over the miracle. It seems further that
this is included in Shulchan Aruch’s ruling: "Women are also obligated in the four cups and in all
the mitzvot that are practiced on that night." Hallel on the night of Pesach with a beracha [before
the Seder] is one of the mitzvot of Pesach night. If so, women, too, must say it with
a beracha before the beginning of the Seder…

In practice, a woman should make an effort to recite any Hallel in which she might be obligated,
but she has halachic views to rely on if she cannot manage it (as on a busy evening before
the Seder).

Abbreviated Hallel

On Rosh Chodesh, there is no prohibition on performing labor, so there is no obligation to recite

a full Hallel.

Arachin 10a

…So then [we should say it on] Rosh Chodesh, which is called a mo’ed? It was not sanctified with
a [prohibition against] doing work, as it is written (Yeshayahu 30:29) “This song will be for you

25
like a night that was sanctified as a festival.” A night sanctified as a festival [when work is
prohibited] requires shira, and one not sanctified as a festival does not require shira.

How can this passage take the omission of Hallel on Rosh Chodesh for granted, when it is
customary to say Hallel on Rosh Chodesh? Elsewhere, the Talmud explains:

Ta'anit 28b

Rav arrived in Bavel and saw that they recited Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. He thought he should stop
them. When he saw that they skipped sections, he said, “This indicates that they are acting in
accordance with the custom of their fathers.” It is taught: An individual should not begin [Hallel],
but if he began, he finishes [it].

Already in Talmudic times, the Jewish community in the diaspora had the custom on Rosh
Chodesh of reciting a partial Hallel, Hallel be-dilug (lit., Hallel with skipped-over passages). Rav,
coming from Israel, was unfamiliar with the custom, which may have originated as a way for
diaspora communities to remember kiddush ha-chodesh, the sanctification of the new moon.[18]

Tosafot explain that the abbreviated Hallel has the status of custom, not commandment.

Tosafot Arachin 10a s.v. eighteen

"When he saw that they skipped sections, he said, ‘This indicates that they are acting in accordance
with the custom of their fathers.’" This indicates that Rav thought that people did not recite
[Hallel] at all. If so, our saying it is certainly just a custom and not an obligation as on the eighteen
days. In any case, Rabbeinu Tam says that one must recite a beracha over it, as indicated by the
fact that he [Rav] thought to stop them …For otherwise, the moment Rav saw that they did not
recite a beracha before it, he would have instantly been able to understand that it was not [treated
as obligation] but as custom...

Rabbeinu Tam adds that even though Hallel on Rosh Chodesh is only a custom, we do recite
a beracha over it. (This aligns with his position permitting women to recite berachot when
performing mitzvot voluntarily.) Had the congregation in Bavel begun Hallel without a beracha,
Rav would have understood immediately that they considered the recitation a custom and not a
commandment.

There are two other positions on reciting a beracha over Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. Rif maintains
that one recites a beracha over an abbreviated Hallel only within a congregation.[19] Rambam
rules that one does not recite berachot over customs.

Rambam Berachot 11:16

Every matter which is a custom, even if it is a custom of the prophets, like taking the willow on
Hoshana Rabba, and it goes without saying a custom of the sages, such as reciting Hallel on Rosh
Chodesh and chol ha-mo'ed of Pesach, one does not recite a beracha over it.

26
Shulchan Aruch cites the more restrictive views, while Rema allows for an individual to recite
the beracha.[20]

Shulchan Aruch OC 422:2

They recite Hallel be-dilug, whether an individual or the community. There are those who say that
the congregation recites a beracha over it…but the individual does not recite a beracha over it.
There are those who say that even the congregation should not recite a beracha over it, neither at
the beginning nor at the end, and this is Rambam's view and thus we practice in the entire Land
of Israel and its surroundings. Rema: There are those who say that even an individual recites
a beracha over it. Thus, we practice in these lands. In any case, a person should take care to recite
it communally in order to recite a beracha over it with the congregation.

Hallel is not completed on the last six days of Pesach, because their mussaf sacrifice is identical
to that of the first day.[21] Contemporary custom is also to recite Hallel be-dilug on the final six
days of Pesach, and to treat it like Hallel on Rosh Chodesh.[22]

Shulchan Aruch OC 490:4

Every day of chol ha-mo’ed and the last two days of Yom Tov, Hallel is read be-dilug as on Rosh
Chodesh.

Women Reciting Abbreviated Hallel

Even though the exemption from positive time-bound commandments generally applies to Hallel,
many women took on the binding custom to say Hallel on Rosh Chodesh, as men did. Mishna
Berura makes this point, and adds that, in communities in which individuals recite
a beracha over Hallel, women and men alike can rely on Tosafot's ruling to permit
reciting berachot over customs.

Bei'ur Halacha 422:2

Magen Avraham indicates that this law [exempting women from Hallel] also applies on Rosh
Chodesh. But, in my humble opinion, this is not clear. For this is relevant only on days on which
we complete Hallel…It makes sense that for Hallel on Rosh Chodesh, when it is our custom to
recite a beracha, a woman may also recite a beracha like men.... And in the siddur of Ya’avetz, he
wrote that women should not recite a beracha over Hallel on Rosh Chodesh, but practice is not in
accordance with his opinion.

Rosh Chodesh is considered a sort of Yom Tov for women. Rebbitzen Chana Bracha Siegelbaum
teaches that women's connection to Rosh Chodesh provides added impetus for reciting Hallel.[23]

Chana Bracha Siegelbaum, "Praising Hashem through Song"

Although women are exempted from reciting Hallel on Rosh Chodesh and during the holidays
since it is a positive time-bound mitzvah (Biur Halacha, Orach Chaim, Siman 422), it seems to me,

27
that if we are created in order to praise Hashem, then we should still make the effort. In the past,
when women had to go down to the well to draw water, wash the garments by hand, grind their
own flour, and dig up their own potatoes, it is understandable why they should be exempt from
reciting Hallel. Today, with washing-machines, disposable diapers, food-processors and pre-
checked greens, women have much less of an excuse to refrain from prayer. Especially on Rosh
Chodesh, when women are accustomed to abstain from work (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim 417)
it seems to me, that we should prioritize praising Hashem by reciting Hallel. Reciting Hallel, is
actually considered a minhag (custom) even for men. So just as men have taking this custom upon
themselves and are strict about reciting Hallel on Rosh Chodesh, why should women do any less?
Aren’t women also created for the sake of praising Hashem?

Hallel and the Community

Drawing from the example of Moshe and benei Yisrael at the sea, Jews during the Mishnaic era
recited Hallel communally as a series of calls and responses. The leader would discharge the
obligation the entire congregation, who would answer with a few key phrases, or "Halleluyah."

Sota 30b

Rabbi Akiva expounded: when Israel came up from the sea, they set themselves to reciting song.
How did they recite song? Like an adult who leads Hallel and they repeat after him the beginning
of each section [of Tehillim]

Rashi Sota 30b

Like an adult who leads Hallel: He recites it for the congregation to discharge their obligation.

When more Jews became able to recite Hallel fluently, in Talmudic times, the leader no longer
discharged others' obligations. Much of the call and response format was still maintained, in part
to preserve memory of the original practice.

Rashi Sukka 38b

From the minhag of Hallel. From what we see practiced nowadays in synagogues…We say all
of Hallel along with the leader until “Hodu” and respond “Hodu” after him and go back to
reciting [Hallel] with him until “Ana” and respond ”Ana hoshi’a na” and “Ana hatzlicha na”
after him, as we do, and this is not like the recitation of the first ones [Tannaim], who would
respond “Halleluyah” after everything…And Rava said that from the current custom we learn
what is the essence of reciting Hallel when they first enacted it… what the first ones [Tannaim]
established to respond for those who are and are not expert [in reciting it].

28
In our day, too, the leader of Hallel no longer discharges others' obligations, and we recite it with
very little call and response. The call and response that remain are important, though. For this
reason, halachic authorities encourage reciting Hallel with the community. Magen Avraham even
writes that a person arriving late to synagogue should delay other prayers (or interrupt Pesukei de-
zimra) in order to recite Hallel with the community.

Magen Avraham 422:2

To recite it in the community: If one comes to the synagogue close to the time of Hallel, he should
recite Hallel first with the community and then pray.

From its origins, communal Hallel, an opportunity to praise and thank God en masse, has had a
special level of meaning. Rav Soloveitchik puts this in halachic terms. He writes that
reciting Hallel be-tzibbur, communal Hallel of call and response, fulfills the mitzva more
completely than an individual's Hallel.

Reshimot Shiurei Ha-Gri"d Soloveitchik, Sukka 38a s.v. ve-nir'eh

Fulfillment of the mitzva of response is applicable only in a congregation—for the prayer leader
recites, invites, and demands that the congregation respond…Indeed the individual is able to fulfill
only the simple mitzva of reciting Hallel, and lacks the complete mitzva of Hallel that comes into
being with the response of the congregation.

What counts as community?

While Rav Soloveitchik writes that a communal Hallel requires a minyan,[26] a midrash suggests
that a group of three can suffice:

Midrash Tehillim 113

[“Halleluyah. Halleu avdei Hashem. Hallelu et shem Hashem.] Praise God. Give praise you
servants of God. Praise the name of God.” From here the sages said that
[responsive] Hallel needs no less than three people. To whom does he say "Hallelu/Praise" [in
plural]? To two people. And the one who says it is one, so there are three.

Rema rules in accordance with this position:

Rema Shulchan Aruch OC 422:2

There are those who say that when an individual recites Hallel, he says it to two people so they
will say the beginning of each [responsive] section with him, for then it is like many [people]..
This practice was adopted with “Hodu” but not with ”Ana.”

Mishna Berura explains that finding another two people to recite Hallel with is ideal, though not
obligatory, and this holds true for all recitations of Hallel.[27]

29
Mishna Berura 422:18

Later halachic authorities wrote that there is no practical difference in this matter between Rosh
Chodesh and days on which we complete the Hallel, and in all cases one should say it to two
[people]…but they wrote that the essence of this matter is only lechat’chila [ideally], and if there
aren’t two people available, he need not chase after them.

If a collective for Hallel's call and response need not be a minyan then perhaps the minimum group
of three could include women (or even children old enough to understand Hallel):

Rosh Pesachim 10:32

What is [described] in midrash Tehillim, [a man] with his wife and a minor of educable age, can
recite “Hodu” [on seder night].

In this spirit, women praying outside of a minyan have reason to recite Hallel together, including
the responsive sections. While Hallel among a group of women may not meet Rav Soloveitchik's
definition of a communal Hallel, it is likely considered a Hallel of call and response. In this sense,
it is reminiscent of Miriam's song at the sea.

Mechilta of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai 15:21

"And Miriam led them [the women] responsively:" The verse tells us that just as Moshe
said shira [song] for the men, so did Miriam say shira for the women.

The song of Miriam and the daughters of Israel provides inspiration for women reciting Hallel in
any context, alone or together.

Deracheha Staff; Laurie Novick, Director9

[1] Pesachim 117a

We learned in a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: David said all the praises written in the Sefer Tehillim, as it is written, “’The
prayers of David the son of Yishai are completed (kalu),’ do not read it as kalu, rather as kol elu (all of these).” Who said it [Hallel]?
Rabbi Yosi says: My son Elazar says Moshe and Israel said it when they emerged from the [Red] Sea. And his fellows dispute him,
saying that David said it. But his opinion appears more likely than theirs, for how can it be that Israel slaughtered their Pesach
offerings and took their lulavim and did not recite shira?!

9
https://www.deracheha.org/hallel/:Deracheha is an initiative of Yeshivat Har Etzion
in partnership with the Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash
and the Stella K. Abraham Beit Midrash For Women – Migdal Oz

30
As Rashi explains, Rabbi Yosi is inclined to accept his son’s opinion that Hallel originated with the exodus from Egypt and splitting
of the sea, because he cannot fathom how generations of Israelites slaughtered the Pesach sacrifice or waved the lulav without the
accompaniment of the joyous song of Hallel.
[2] Pesachim 117a
Our Rabbis taught: Who said this Hallel? Rabbi Elazar said: Moshe and Israel said it when they stood at the [Red] Sea they
said, (Tehillim 115:1) "Not for our sake, God, not for our sake..." the Divine spirit answered and said to them (Yeshayahu 48:11)
“For my sake, for my sake I will do it.” Rabbi Yehuda said: Yehoshua and Israel said it when the Kings of Canaan threatened them;
they said, "Not for our sake," and [the Divine spirit] answered.... Rabbi Elazar Hamoda’i said: Devora and Barak said it when
Sisera threatened them…Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: Chizkia and his assembly said it when Sancheriv threatened them...Rabbi
Akiva said: Chananya, Misha’el, and Azaria said it when the wicked Nevuchadnezzar threatened them....Rabbi Yosi the Galilean
said: Mordechai and Esther said it when the wicked Haman threatened them...
[3] Tosafot Sukka 44b
For the redemption of all of Israel we say it [Hallel] in perpetuity.
[4] Chiddushei Ha-Gri"z Arachin 10b
They are two laws [of reciting Hallel]: "on each season," i.e. the eighteen set days, and "on each and every trouble" is a distinct
law, which is that we can say Hallel at every time that we are redeemed from trouble.
[5] Arachin 10a-b
Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon son of Yehotzadak: There are eighteen days on which an individual recites
full Hallel: The eight days of Chag, the eight days of Chanuka….But Chanuka…[we recite a full Hallel] because of the miracle.
[6] Berachot 14b
Hallel is rabbinic
[7] Ta'anit 28b
Rava said: This tells us that Hallel on Rosh Chodesh is not a Torah obligation.
[8] Mishneh Torah Megilla and Chanuka 3:6
Reciting Hallel is always rabbinic on all the days on which we recite the complete Hallel.
[9] Sha'agat Aryeh rejects the possibility that Hallel is an aspect of the shira of simchat Yom Tov, since then one might argue that
women would be obligated in Hallel of Yom Tov, which would contradict the mishna in Sukka:
Sha'agat Aryeh 69
It does not make sense to say this, for if it is true, there is no reason to exempt women from Hallel, since they are obligated in the
essential song [of Yom Tov] like men…Rather it is certain that reciting Hallel is not included in the mitzva of simcha at all and is
only rabbinic.
[10] Ramban's Glosses to Rambam's Sefer Ha-mitzvot, Shoresh 1
…At Sinai, Moshe was commanded that Israel should recite shira to the God who took them out of Egypt and split the sea for them
and set them apart to serve Him. David came and established this Hallel for them so they would recite it. And also the songs in the
Temple [the Psalms that were recited when sacrifices were offered, which were composed by David]… And it seems from their
words that it (Hallel) is from the Torah, as I have explained, and it is either halacha l’Moshe miSinai [a Torah-level mitzva without
a clear Scriptural source] or it is included in the general commandment to rejoice [on the festivals], as it says, “On the day of you
joy and your appointed timed and the beginnings of your months, you shall blast the trumpets on your burnt-offerings and on your
peace-offerings.” As the essence of shira is singing with the mouth, and instruments are just used to make the voice sweeter. We
were commanded to rejoice in song with our sacrifices. At other times, [Hallel] is included in the general commandment of rejoicing
[on the festivals]. …It’s possible that this [statement that Hallel is rabbinic] was said about the days of Chanuka and the days that
an individual does not complete Hallel….
[11] Ra'avad rules along these lines:
Ra'avad on Mishneh Torah Megilla and Chanuka 3:6
They [recitations of Hallel] involve a positive commandment from Divrei Kabbala [received Torah from the prophets], "The song
will be for you as on the night of sanctifying the festive offering" (Yeshayahu 30:29).
[12] Mishna Sukka 3:10
If an adult male recited Hallel for him, he responds after him "Halleluyah".
[13] For more on discharging obligations, see our articles here and here.
[14] Rambam, Laws of Megilla and Chanuka 3:6, 14
Not only the Hallel on Chanuka is rabbinic but reciting Hallel is always rabbinic on every day on which we recite the full Hallel…If
the person calling out the Hallel is a minor or bondsman or woman, [a man] repeats after them what they say word for word, for
the entire Hallel.
[15] Available here: https://ots.org.il/hallel-song-seder/
[16] Bei'ur Halacha 422:2
According to the halachic authorities, women are exempt from Hallel because it is a positive time-bound mitzva [except
for Hallel on Pesach night, in which they are obligated because they too were part of the miracle, as Tosafot wrote]
[17] Available here: https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1490&pgnum=269
[18] Shita Mekubetzet Berachot 14a
On Rosh Chodesh, even the congregation do not recite it except as a custom, a reminder of kiddush ha-chodesh.
[19] Rif Shabbat 11b

31
It is taught: An individual should not begin [Hallel], but if he began [it], he finishes [it]. Therefore, if an individual wishes to
recite Hallel on Rosh Chodesh, he recites it without a beracha, and skips over passages.
Perhaps the role of commemorating the sanctification of the new month is inherently communal.
[20] Chabad practice is for the prayer leader to recite the beracha on behalf of the entire congregation.
Siddur of Rav Schneuer Zalman of Liadi
On the days on which we do not complete the Hallel, proper practice is for only the shaliach tzibbur to recite the beracha at the
beginning and end, and the congregation should answer “amen” and discharge their obligation with his beracha.
[21] Other halachic authorities provide ideological reasons why Hallel is not recited on the last six days of Pesach. For example,
Shibolei Heleket explains that it is inappropriate to recite Hallel since that is when the Egyptians drowned, and we do not rejoice
in our enemies' downfall. It is difficult to see how he reconciles this view with the Talmud's suggestion that the first Hallel was
recited at the Sea itself.
Shibbolei Ha-leket Rosh Chodesh 174
On Pesach we don't complete Hallel except for the first day and its night. Why? Shemuel son of Abba said: "In the fall of your
enemy do not rejoice," because on it [the seventh day of Pesach] the Egyptians drowned.
[22] Ramban, however, reportedly ruled that the enactment to recite Hallel be-dilug on Pesach also applies to an individual who
should recite it with a beracha, while on Rosh Chodesh one should not.
Maggid Mishneh Megilla and Chanuka 3:5
The view of Rambam is to equate chol ha-mo'ed of Pesach with Rosh Chodesh [regarding Hallel] and this seems to be the view of
all commentators aside from Ramban, who distinguished between them and said that on chol ha-mo'ed of Pesach even the
individual is obligated to recite an abbreviated Hallel, because the essence of the enactment was thus, to say it on chol ha-
mo'ed Pesach in abbreviated form and to recite a beracha over it.
[23] Available here:
https://rebbetzinchanabracha.blogspot.com/2011/03/haftorat-parashat-vayikra.html
[24] Yechaveh Da'at 5:34
However, for us, who follow the ruling of Shulchan Aruch that also regarding reading megilla women discharge men's
obligations…If so, also regarding Hallel of Pesach night one can say this.
[25] In a discussion of Hallel in a synagogue setting (available here, p. 124 and footnote 409) Rabbis Aryeh and Dov Frimer raise
other concerns. For example, they contend, in the name of Rav Aharon Lichtenstein and Rav Avigdor Nebenzahl, that a woman
leading Hallel is a violation of kevod ha-tzibbur. We plan to discuss women leading parts of the synagogue service in a future
piece.
[26] Reshimot Shiurei Ha-Grid Soloveitchik Sukka 38b s.v. be-ram
Indeed Rav Moshe [Soloveitchik] said…that the minyan that is necessary for call and response for Hallel is a minyan of ten.
[27] Aruch Ha-shulchan views this discussion, as well as the ruling that the latecomer to synagogue should delay prayer for the
congregation's Hallel, as specific to the case of Hallel on Rosh Chodesh or the last six days of Pesach, where there is a halachic
question about an individual reciting Hallel with a beracha.
Aruch Ha-shulchan OC 422:8
All this applies on Rosh Chodesh and chol ha-mo’ed Pesach and the last two days of Pesach, but when we complete the Hallel, there
is no need for all this, because on them the individual is obligated to recite a beracha.

32