Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Having explained the nature of the obligations to fast and sound the trumpets in the previous chapter, the Rambam devotes this chapter to explaining the various situations in which these obligations apply.
It must be noted that the advances of civilization have cushioned us against many of these natural disasters and it is not common f or us to fast because of these situations. Nevertheless, the obligation for a community to fast in such times of distress applies even in the present age and in the diaspora. Thus, both the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch devote an entire chapter (576) to the discussion of fasts of this nature. Nevertheless, in the present era, even in times of genuine communal distress, it is infrequent f or the Rabbis to declare a communal fast, because our physical stamina is not as great as that of the previous generations.

Both Hebrew terms arbeh and chasil refer to species of locusts. The exact names of the species intended is a source of debate.

And because of earthquakes or hurricanes strong enough to cause buildings to topple.

The lack of rain is the most common and the most widely discussed of all the phenomena mentioned. Nevertheless, it is precisely for that reason that it is discussed last. All the other phenomena are discussed briefly in this chapter, while the fasts concerning rain are discussed in several halachot in this chapter and in the following two chapters in their entirety.

From Chapter 1, Halachah 5, it appears that the the intent is not to fast on consecutive days until the difficulty passes, but rather to fast on the Mondays and Thursdays in this period. Nevertheless, in times of great distress, the Rabbis occasionally ordained consecutive fasts.

Only the people in the immediate vicinity of the distressed area are obligated to fast. Were we to be obligated to fast for difficulties in distant places, we would be constantly fasting, for there are, , ע”ל a multitude of difficulties throughout the world (Kessef Mishneh). Although this ruling is generally followed, there are times when public fasts are called when Jews in distant lands are in profound distress. In particular, this applies with regard to the Jews in Eretz Yisrael. (See Halachah 6.)

Chapter 1, Halachah 6. See also Hilchot Shabbat 2:24.

In that halachah, it is mentioned that we also cry out to God in prayer on the Sabbath on behalf of people whose lives are in immediate danger—e.g., a besieged city or a ship in danger of sinking.

This refers to an unfair tax imposed on the Jews alone, and not a tax on all the inhabitants of the country.

Here too, mortal danger is involved. As the Rambam writes in Hilchot Yesodei HaTorah 5:3, we are obligated to sacrifice our lives if gentiles pass a decree forbidding the observance of even a seemingly slight mitzvah (Kinat Eliyahu).

For the latter purpose, this is permitted even on the Sabbath, as stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 6.

This also refers to Jewish settlements in the Diaspora.

Although the Rambam proves his point through Biblical exegesis, anyone who reads the chronicles of the rampages of «friendly» armies through the various periods of Jewish history will realize how the passage of any armed forces can constitute communal distress f or our people.

I.e., since the lack of passage of an armed force is considered a blessing, it can be assumed that the passage of an armed force is the opposite.

The Lechem Mishneh associates this ruling with the concept of chazakah, i.e., once a phenomenon is repeated three times, it can be presumed to recur.

In one of his responsa, the Rambam writes that the numbers mentioned in this halachah also include gentiles. If a city is smitten by a plague, it will spread among all its inhabitants, whether Jew or gentile. This concept is quoted as halachah by the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 576:3).

The Maggid Mishneh notes that the Mishnah (Ta’ anit 3: 1) uses the expression רגלי for inhabitants. From Exodus 12:37, “600,000 men on foot (רגלי) aside from children,” we know that the term refers to ad.ult males able to perform military service (i.e., below the age of sixty). The commentaries explain that elderly men, children, and women are considered to have a weaker constitution than adult males. Hence, it is only when a significant number of adult males die that one may be sure that the deaths can be attributed to a plague. (See also the Jerusalem Talmud, Ta’anit 3:5.)

Ta’anit 21b explains the rationale for this halachah: “If a Matron (Eretz Yisrael) is stricken, is it not likely that the maid-servant (the diaspora) will be stricken.” The welfare of the inhabitants of Eretz Yisrael is a matter of concern for all Jews.
The Ramah (Orach Chayim 576:2) states that this applies only when the plague has affected Eretz Yisrael in its entirety.

The Magen Avraham 576:2 states that it is not customary at present to fast because of a plague. The nature of our physical constitutions has changed, and, were the inhabitants of a city afflicted by a plague to fast, it is more likely that they would succumb to it. Similarly, if caravans frequently travel from one city to another, there is the danger of infection. Theref ore, even people in the distant city should not fast (Mishnah Berurah 576:10).

As mentioned in Halachah 2, in such an instance the surrounding cities should fast as long as there is no danger of infection (ibid. ).

We have translate the word משלחת in this manner so that its intent will be easily understood. It is, however, worthy to mention the interpretation of Rashi, Ta’anit 22a, who interprets the word as “sent from Heaven,” i.e., a minister of Divine retribution.

A wild animal would not ordinarily enter a populated area during the daytime.

Although wild animals occasionally wander through fields, their tendency is to flee when they encounter humans.

As the Rambam mentions, it is common to find wild animals in a swamp. Therefore, the fact that they do not flee when discovered close to a swamp is not considered extraordinary. If, however, the animal pursues them, this is considered a departure from the norm and a sign that it was «sent from Heaven.»

It is not out of the ordinary for a wild animal to pursue intruders to its natural home.

The fact that the animal ate only one of the men is a clear indication that it was motivated by reasons other than natural hunger when it slew the men.

The Mishnah Berurah 576:23 states that a deep forest is governed by the same laws as a swamp.

Ta’anit 22a mentions this teaching in connection with hunters’ huts.

Reptiles as opposed to mammals.

The Ra’avad protests, stating that if these animals kill humans, that is a sign that they were chosen as “messengers of God,” and fasting should be instituted because of them. Although the Maggid Mishneh does not accept this ruling, the Kessef Mishneh takes note of the term “that cause injury,” and explains that the Rambam himself would accept the Ra’avad’s view when it has been demonstrated that these animals have deadly intentions. In his Beit Yosef and Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 576:7), Rav Y osef Karo quotes and even extends this interpretation.

Our translation of kanaf is taken from Rav Kapach, whose interpretation is based on the Arabic term used by the Rambam for that word in the Guide to the Perplexed, Vol. 1, Chapter 43. In his commentary, he also sheds light on the tendencies of the various insects mentioned by the Rambam. Others interpret kanaf as ref erring to a single locust.

Locusts multiply speedily. If one fleet is seen, we can assume that soon there will be swarms of them that will cover the entire countryside.

Govai is also a species of locusts. They are more dangerous than the others.

Chagav is also a species of locusts; they are smaller than the others and do not pose a serious danger to the crops.

We have followed the translation of “The Living Torah” (Deuteronomy 28:22), for it appears appiopriate in the immediate context. Both these terms appear to ref er to agriculural afflictions that affect crops and spread from field to field. Others, however, render either or both of these terms as damage to crops from a searing hot wind or burning sun.

As mentioned, the fear is that the contagion will spread from field to field. For this reason, the entire region in which the blight is f ound is required to fast (Ramah, Orach Chayim 576:8).

I.e., a portion of the field the size of the opening of an oven. Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (Ta’anit 3:5). The Maggid Mishneh and others offer a different explanation, “the amount of grain necessary to bake enough bread to fill the mouth of an oven.”

The Mishnah Berurah 576:11 quotes the Ritba as explaining that this refers to the walls of three homes.

If, however, the houses are located on a river bank, the fact that the walls fall can be attributed to the erosion of their foundations by the water.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ta’anit 3:4), the Rambam writes that this refers to walls that fall without any apparent reason.

The Hebrew אסכרה is related to the root סרנו, which means “close.” It refers to a throat infection which forces a person to keep his mouth closed (Ramah, Orach Chayim 576:5).

Our translation, admittedly somewhat of an extension, is based on the commentary of Rav Sa’adiah Gaon on Deuteronomy 28:22. Rashi describes it as a disease that causes a person to run a very high fever and to constantly thirst f or water; perhaps typhoid.

The Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 576) questions why the Rambam does not mention that the situation warrants a fast only when three people die in three days, as he did with regard to plague (Halachah 5). He concludes that there is a more severe element to these epidemics ·than plague, and even if fewer than three people die each day, a communal fast should be held. The Ramah (Orach Chayim 576:5) quotes this as halachah.
The Lechem Mishneh explains the diff erence between the two as f ollows: Plague refers to an instance when death hits the city before there is an outbreak of illness. In contrast, the epidemic mentioned in this halachah ref ers to an instance where both illness and death are manifest in the city.

Literally, “a moist itch”—i.e., a skin inflammation that is aggravating and produces lymph secretions. Bava Kama 80b states that we cry out to God f or relief from this ailment, even on the Sabbath. The Lechem Mishneh questions why the Rambam does not quote this concept.

Although we have translated מתריעים as “sound the trumpets” throughout the text, we have altered our translation in this halachah, because in Halachah 2, the Rambam explicitly states that we call out to God on the Sabbath because of the loss of our source of sustenance, but we may not sound the trumpets. The word מתריעים is used as a quote from Bava Batra 91a.

Significantly, Bava Batra (ibid.) does not mention fasting f or this reason. Accordingly, the Ritba (Ta’anit 19b) states that this is not cause for a public fast. The ruling of most authorities (see Mishnah Berurah 576:29) is that a communal fast should be called.

As mentioned in Halachah 2, this and the instances when people’s lives are in immediate danger are the only times when such prayers are offered on the Sabbath.

Ta’anit 22b mentions this with regard to Babylon, which is a valley and whose homes are not built with sturdy f oundations.
ote the Tur and the Shulchan Aruch, who quote the Rambam’s statements (Orach Chayim 576:11), but also mention (577:1) a less extreme instance of abundant rainfall, in which the rains prevent the land from being tilled properly.

Hence, abundant rainfall does not pose a danger.

For there are few rivers, and the winter rains are the primary source of water throughout the entire year.

This and the f ollowing two halachot, in contrast to the fasts f or lack of rain mentioned in Chapter 3, describe a situation in which rain has already begun to descend and then ceases. To a certain degree, since crops have already sprouted, this situation is more distressing than if the rains had never descended at all. These three halachot are quoted without emendation in the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 575:8).

At which point, there would be no purpose in continuing the fast.

At this time, more water is necessary to allow the trees to produce fruit.

This and the previous halachah apply only in Eretz Yisrael where the rains are seasonal in this manner. ‘ln other countries, different principles apply.
Most texts of the Jerusalem Talmud (Ta’anit 3:2) which is the direct source for this halachah, state Atzeret (Shavuot), rather than Sukkot. The Rambam’s choice of this version of the text can be explained in that it is very unlikely f or rain to descend in the summer (the season of Shavuot) in Eretz Yisrael. ln contrast, it is possible for rain to descend on Sukkot, although this is slightly earlier than usual. Thus the Rambam chose the version that is closer to the prevailing circumstances.

The Ritba states that, in such circumstances, one should call out for Divine mercy, even on the Sabbath.

Ta’anit 6a relates that the rainy season in Eretz Yisrael begins in the month of Marcheshvan. The third of the month is considered to be the earliest time rain can be expected to descend.
In other lands, such fasts should be held when, ,ל”ע they are necessary according to the local needs and climate (Halachah 10; Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 575:9).

The rains have already been delayed. To hasten the manifestation of Divine blessing

and repent. Nevertheless, the situation is not serious enough to alarm the people at large.

i.e.; the Monday closest to the seventeenth of Marcheshvan, for, as explained in Chapter 1, Halachah 5, a series of communal fasts should always begin on a Monday.

These fasts begin at dawn; work, anointing oneself, wearing shoes, and sexual relations are permitted.
The Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 575: 1) emphasizes that these fasts are considered individual fasts and not communal fasts.

At certain times, ordinary students are advised to ref rain from accepting stringencies intended f or the Torah sages, lest they appear overly proud. In this instance, however, Ta’anit 10b suggests that all students of the Torah accept these fasts if possible.

The drought is considered serious enough to warrant that

If, however, Rosh Chodesh Kislev itself falls on a Monday, the fast is not held until the Monday of the f ollowing week.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 5, when necessary the court ordains a series of three fasts to evoke Divine favor.

until dawn, or until one goes to sleep. (See Chapter 1, Halachah 8.)

See Hilchot Klei Hamikdash 3:9, which states that the prophet Samuel and King David ordained 24 priestly watches, which rotated in the Temple service. Each week, a different watch would serve.

This leniency includes even the members of the families who are not obligated to serve in the Temple on that day, for many sacrifices may be brought unexpectedly and they may be called to assist in the service. Were they to be fasting, they would not be able to perform this service properly (Ta’anit 2:6).

i.e., the prayer Anenu is recited in the Shemoneh Esreh, and other supplicatory prayers are recited.

The trumpets, however, are not sounded.

By choosing this wording (quoted from Ta’anit 1:6), the Rambam teaches us a lesson in the service of God. It could have said, “If these fasts pass without rain having descended.” The Rambam and the Mishnah, however, want to emphasize that the ultimate reason why rain descends or does not descend is not dependent on natural factors, but rather on God’s mercies.

of a more severe nature.
There are some texts of the Mishneh Torah that read “[starting on] a Monday, [and continuing on] the [following] Thursday, and the [following] Monday,” and other texts read “[starting on] Thursday, [and continuing on] the [following] Monday, and the [following] Thursday.”
The difference between these two versions depends on the difference of opinion mentioned in the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 5, concerning the question: Should the second series of fasts begin on a Thursday or not?

I.e., as on Yom Kippur, we are forbidden to eat and drink after sunset.

because these fasts are more severe and also because, at the beginning of the day, it was less likely that they be called to assist in the Temple service

lest they become weak and be unable to serve in the Temple when called.

for the above reason.

concluded his meal

for this is considered as if he accepted the fast upon himself

The Ramban and the Maggid Mishneh diff er with the Rambam on this point and maintain that as long as one has not made an explicit statement to the fact that one has accepted the fast, one is allowed to change one’s mind and eat. The rationale f or their ruling is that, as explained above, on these fasts, in contrast to Y om Kippur, there is no obligation to begin the fast bef ore sunset.
With regard to the laws of Tish’ah B’Av—and from there we can extrapolate to the instance at hand—the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 553:1) accepts the Ramban’s ruling. The Mishneh Berurah 553:2, however, states that a mental resolve to accept the fast is also sufficient to cause one to be forbidden to eat further.

As the Rambam mentions in Chapter 1, Halachah 4, all the fasts mentioned in this text are Rabbinic in origin. The only fast mentioned in the Torah is Yom Kippur. Accordingly, when the Sages instituted communal fasts, they used Yom Kippur as a paradigm. Theref ore, just as it is forbidden to perf orm work, wash, anoint oneself, engage in sexual relations, or wear shoes on that holy day, these activities were also forbidden on other fast days.
Nevertheless, on fast days other than Yom Kippur, certain leniencies were instituted, and these restrictions were not enforced to the same degree as on Yom Kippur.

Ta’anit 12b brings support for this concept from the exegesis of Joel 2:15: “Sanctify the fast day; call an assembly, and collect the elders.” The word for “assembly,” עצרה, resembles the Biblical name for the holiday of Shavuot, עצרה. Just as it is forbidden to work on Shavuot, so too, it is forbidden to work on a fast day.

Ta’anit, ibid., continues using exegesis to show that, in contrast to Shavuot, working on the night of a fast day is permitted.

but one may wash one’s body with cold water (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 575:3).

even in hot water (loc. cit. ).

to ensure that this prohibition is observed.

for the sake of pleasure.

or for medicinal reasons (Mishnah Berurah 575:7).

This applies even on the night of a woman’s ritual immersion (Mishnah Berurah 575:8).

for making a journey without proper shoes is extremely uncomf ortable.

As opposed to the following sequence of fasts, whose prayer services are held in the streets of the city, as explained in Chapter 4.

The trumpets, however, are not sounded.

The Rambam, based on his interpretation of Ta’anit 14a, does not consider the nature of the situation during the first two sets of fasts serious enough to warrant that these women fast. During these seven fasts, in contrast, the drought has become a real danger. Hence, they are also required to fast.
This ruling is not accepted by many other authorities. Most follow Rashi’s interpretation of the passage, which requires these women to fast during the second set of three fasts only. The rationale for that ruling is that he feels that the drought has already become serious enough to warrant their fasting during the second set of three fasts. In principle, these women should also fast during the final seven fasts, but the Rabbis felt that such a long period of fasting would be too taxing for them. Hence, they restricted their fasts to the second set alone. This is the ruling quoted by the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 575:5).

The sc;1-me applies to other individuals who are ill and would suffer from the fast.

lt is significant to mention the statement of the Ramah (Orach Chayim, ibid.), “It is f orbidden f or them to be stringent with themselves and fast.”

Because of the severity of the situation, the leniencies that applied in the previous sets of fasts were withdrawn, and the men of the priestly watch who were not required to serve in the Temple that day were required to complete the fast. Even those who were required to serve in the Temple on that day (the men of the beit av) were obligated to fast for a portion of the day.

Nevertheless, with the exception of the factors mentioned in the following halachah, these fasts are also not more severe. Hence, the leniencies with regard to work, washing, anointing oneself, and wearing shoes mentioned in the previous halachah also apply.

The first four points mentioned in this halachah are described at length in Chapter 4.

as required in a time of distress (Chapter 1, Halachah 1). In Chapter 4, Halachot 14-17, the manner in which the trumpets are sounded is explained.

See Chapter 4, Halachah 1

See Chapter 4, Halachah 2

See Chapter 4, Halachot 7-14

Although the Talmud does not mention that these six
lessings were added in both prayer services, were this not to be the case, it would have been proper to state that they were added only in the morning service (Maggid Mishneh).

More precisely 25. The Rambam is quoting the Mishnah (Ta’anit 2:2), which refers to the era before the nineteenth blessing was added to the daily Shemoneh Esreh. (See Hilchot Tefillah 2:1.)

with the leniencies to be mentioned. The stores are closed to intensify the people’s consciousness of the fast (Rashi, Ta’anit 14b ).

From the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 575:4), the Ramah, and other commentaries, it appears that the leniencies mentioned here refer only to stores that sell f ood, but not those that carry other merchandise.

but they should not be opened completely

to allow people to purchase food for the evening meal. There are, however, certain restrictions; f or example, the products in the store may not be taken out to the store’s display area (Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah, Ta’anit 1:6).

The following restriction should be adhered to:

From the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (loc. cit. ), it appears that this restriction applies on Mondays as well as on Thursdays.

A bench for the storekeeper and/or customers to sit and a place for merchandise to be placed.

Rashi, Ta’anit 14b, explains that the display area prevents the entrances to the store from being seen. Hence, there is no difficulty in leaving them both open.

no other communal fasts are ordained, as explained in the following halachah. The fact that no other fasts are called does not mean that the community may return to their ordinary pattern of conduct. Quite the contrary: the period is regarded as one of Divine disfavor. Hence,

The restrictions that follow were instituted to reduce joy. In contrast, this restriction appears to include all commercial
ctivity, even that which is not directed associated with happiness (Lechem Mishneh ). Seemingly, the intent is that since the time. is not favorable, it is unwise to invest money and effort in commercial endeavors (Kinat Eliyahu).
There are, however, authorities who maintain that here also, the restriction involves only commercial activity associated with joy—e.g., preparing for a child’s wedding or purchasing valuable articles, but ordinary business activities are permitted (Mishnah Berurah 575: 18).

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (Ta’anit 1 :7), the Rambam states that this refers to ornate buildings erected by the wealthy. There is, however, no restriction on ordinary building projects necessary for one’s everyday purposes.
The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 575:7) describes the prohibition as applying to “buildings of joy.” The Mishnah Berurah 575:18 (based on the Tur) explains that this refers to all buildings that are unnecessary and are constructed f or beauty and comfort.

In this instance, the differences between Hebrew and English have caused our translation to be non-literal. In Hebrew, the word נטיעה refers to both planting trees and setting up tents.

In his Commentary on the Mishnah (ibid. ), the Rambam explains that this refers to spice and flower gardens planted f or pleasure. One may, however, plant orchards for the purpose of growing fruit. There are no restrictions on such activity.

This also refers to tents set up for festive purposes; there is no restriction against pitching tents for ordinary purposes.

The Beit Yosef (Orach Chayim 575) interprets this to mean that a person who has fulfilled the mitzvah of f athering children should not become betrothed or marry at all.

This involves fathering a son and a daughter. (See Hilchot Ishut 15:4.)

Ta’anit 1 la derives this concept from Genesis 41 :50, which states that Joseph’s children were born before the famine. One can infer that during the famine he did not engage in relations.
This restriction was instituted because it is proper to reduce our indulgence in pleasure in a time of communal distress.

Needless to say, frivolity and jests are also forbidden.

A person under a ban of ostracism is f orbidden to greet others or to return greetings. Hence the above prohibition.
Ta’anit 14b states that it is proper to cover one’s head with a cloak as mourners do. Nevertheless, neither the Rambam nor the Shulchan Aruch quotes this obligation (perhaps because even mourners did not generally observe this custom after the Talmudic era).

lest the person become offended (Rashi, Ta’anit 14b); but when doing so, they should respond

so that he will appreciate that the greeting was not in place.

The commentaries do not mention whether it is preferable that all the students of the Torah join in these fasts, as was stated in Halachah 1. One might presume, however, that they should. Indeed, the entire community should have been required to observe these fasts, and it is only because the Rabbis thought that this would be too difficult f or them that they were released f rom this obligation.

As mentioned in the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 5, and in
alachah 3 of this chapter, there are opinions that maintain that if a cycle of fasts ends on Monday—as does the cycle of the seven communal fasts—the next cycle of fasts may be started on the Thursday of that week. Other opinions—and these are followed by the standard published text of the Mishneh Torah—maintain that all cycles of fasts begin on Monday. Hence, if a cycle of fasts ends on Monday, the next cycle begins on the following Monday.
This diff erence of opinion involves much more than one day, f or these fasts are decreed in series of three. Thus, according to the opinion followed by the standard texts, the scholars would fast three days in every two weeks for the duration of the period. The other view, in contrast, would require them to fast on every Monday and Thursday

Ta’anit 1:7 states that these fasts should continue “until Nisan passes.” In the Jerusalem Talmud’s explanation of this Mishnah, it is explained that this refers to Nisan

which always begins in the month of Nisan. In Hilchot Kiddush HaChodesh 9:3, the Rambam defines the beginning of spring as the time the sun enters the zodiac constellation of the goat. This is the beginning of April according to the secular calendar.

Ta’anit 14b considered thirteen fasts as the maximum a community should be required to undertake for this reason. More f asts would be considered an excessive burden. (Significantly, according to Kabbalah, the number thirteen is identified with God’s attributes of mercy.)
As mentioned in the commentary on Chapter 1, Halachah 4, this limit applies only regarding fasts decreed because of a lack of rain. When communal fasts are decreed because of other distressing circumstances, we should continue fasting until our prayers are answered.

i.e., the fast begins at dawn. See Chapter 1, Halachah 8.

These restrictions apply only on Yom Kippur, Tish’ah B’Av, and the latter ten fasts decreed because of a lack of rain.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachah 9, an individual should not fast on these days. Although many individuals may participate in these fasts, they are still deemed individual—and not communal—fasts.

one month after the spring season begins

i.e., the zodiac constellation

This is at the beginning of the secular month of May.

Since the land has already become parched, the rain will be of no benefit. For God to display His beneficence at such a time, after the time had passed when the rain could have helped, is a further sign of Divine disfavor (Rav Ovadiah of Bertinoro ).

As mentioned, in Eretz Yisrael, the rainy season should begin at the start of Marcheshvan.

The Mishnah Berurah 575:24 states that this applies even if a country’s rainy season begins after Shavuot. Note also Hilchot Tefillah 2: 16-17, in which the Rambam discusses the question of requesting rain in lands other than Eretz Yisrael. This question is particularly relevant in regard to countries in the southern hemisphere.

For individual fasts should not be held on these days.

This is approximately the time between the conclusion of the three f asts begun on the seventeenth of Cheshvan, and the beginning of the second series of f asts after Rosh Chodesh Kislev. (See Kessef Mishneh.)

As explained in the following halachah, there are, however, certain differences in the severity of the fasts.

Until dawn. See Chapter 1, Halachah 8.

See Halachah 9. Thus, there are no prohibitions against work, washing, anointing oneself, sexual relations, and wearing shoes on these fasts.

Ta’anit 11b states, “There is no communal fast in Babylon other than Tish’ah B’Av”—i.e., in Babylon, there is no fast as severe as Yom Kippur, with the exception of Tish’ah B’Av. Significantly, Tosafot (loc. cit.) and Rashi (Pesachim 54b) explain that this refers to the land of Babylon, where rains were always plentiful and there was never a need f or fasts.
The Rambam—and other commentaries and authorities, including the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 575: 10)—explain that the law which applies to Babylon, applies to the entire diaspora. It is not that there can be no need f or a communal fast of this nature, but rather that, outside of Eretz Yisrael, the Jewish court lacks the authority to declare such a fast. (See the Jerusalem Talmud, Ta’anit 2:1.)
The Ramban explains that the reason f or the lack of authority is that there is no Nasi in the diaspora, and the declaration of a communal fast would require his approval. The Rashba states that the lack of authority stems from the lack of judges who have received the semichah (ordination) extending back in a chain to Moses. (See Hilchot Sanhedrin, Chapter 4.) According to these opinions, even in Eretz Yisrael today it is impossible to ordain communal fasts of this nature. Note the gloss of the Birkei Yosef on the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 575), where this concept is discussed and a rationale is given for fasting in Eretz Yisrael today.
(Homiletically, it can be explained that the unity necessary to establish a community is possible only in Eretz Yisrael. In contrast, in the diaspora our greater involvement with material affairs prevents the establishment of true oneness among our people.)

Thus, such severe f asts are not ordained f or any of the other difficulties mentioned in the second chapter. Although the Ramban differs with the Rambam on this point, the Rambam’s view is accepted as halachah.

The Beit Yosef ( Orach Chayim 579) emphasizes that this phrase implies an exclusion: This order of prayer is f ollowed only f or the fasts instituted for a lack of rain, and not f or the public fasts instituted for the other reasons mentioned in Chapter 2. Significantly, the Tur maintains that this order is f ollowed on those fasts as well.

This and the following halachot in this chapter are quoted—almost verbatim—from the Mishnah, Ta’anit, Chapter 2. Similarly, they are quoted—almost verbatim—in the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 579).

The Hebrew worq tevah is used. As the Rambam explains in Hilchot Tefillah 11:2-3, a synagogue had two arks: one that was affixed in the wall which was called the heichal, and one that was movable and was positioned at the side of the chazan. This is the tevah ref erred to here.

See Hilchot Tefillah 11:21, where the Rambam explains that these prayers are recited in the street, because they were attended by the entire community and the synagogues were not large enough to contain them.
The transition of the people’s place of prayer from the private confines of a synagogue to the public square is also an act of self-humiliation, intended to evoke Divine mercy. These feelings were intensified by the fact that the ark is also taken out and exposed as well (Ta’anit 16a). Going out to the street is significant from another perspective. It an act of exile, and “exile brings atonement” (ibid. ).

Sackcloth.,is usually used f or animals. Donning it serves as a statement that we do not see ourselves as any more important than they (ibid.). For this reason, the Bible frequently mentions sackcloth as a symbol of mourning and penitence.

Dust is not acceptable. Ashes bring to mind the binding of lsaac; alternatively, they serve as a statement of humility, “we are as ashes before You,” (ibid.).

Ta’anit, ibid, interprets this as a reference to Isaiah 63:9, “Whenever they are in distress, 1 am in distress.”

These words are not included in the text of the Mishnah common at present. The Beit Yosef ( Orach Chayim 579) questions the Rambam’s source. Many commentaries, however, point to the version of Ta’anit 16a cited by Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi and Rabbenu Asher.

Ta’anit, loc. cit., quotes Rabbi Zeira as saying, “When I saw the Rabbis putting ashes on the ark, my entire
ody trembled in shock.”

The head of the court of 71 judges (Hilchot Sanhedrin 1:3).

The second in authority at that court (ibid.).

A person suffers more embarrassment when he is humiliated by another person than when he humiliates himself (Ta’anit, loc. cit.).

Ta’anit, ibid., derives the association between ashes and tefillin from Isaiah 61:3: “To attend to the mourners of Zion, to give them glory instead of ashes.” Glory is associated with tefillin; as mentioned in the exegesis of Ezekiel 24:17, “Your glory is fastened upon you.”

A common person would not suff er any greater shame were the ashes to be placed on his forehead by others. lt is only persons of dignity who are so affected (Ta’anit, ibid. ).

The Mishnah uses the term זקן, which means “elder,” but also serves as an acronym for the phrase, זה שקנה חכמה. Hence, the Rambam (based on Ta’anit 16a) combines the two.

A common person should not be chosen to address the people,
egardless of his age (Ta’anit, ibid. ).

Rashi and Tosafot (Ta’anit, ibid.) maintain that this refers to a person of physical stature, whose bearing would make a deep impression on the community. Rabbenu Asher interprets this as meaning inner, personal stature, referring to the person most fitting to serve as a leader of the community.

The Hebrew divrei kibbushin stems from the root כֶּבֶשׁ, meaning “press.” The intent is that the elder should force the people to confront themselves, “pressing their hearts” as it were, and inspiring them to turn to God in repentance.

Although he is more revered than they, headdresses them as equals. Whenever a person wants to influence others, he should not speak to them with a condescending attitude. Rather, he should seek to establish a commonality with them. This will allow his words to be accepted with greater ease.

This addition to the words of the Mishnah is quoted from Ta’anit, ibid.

“ ... that they had turned from their evil ways.” The people of Nineveh all fasted and donned sackcloth, but this is not what evoked a response from God. It was their change of heart, and an appropriate change of conduct, that caused Divine mercy to be manif est.

Rashi (Ta’anit, ibid.) explains that although both Jonah and Joel are prophetic works, there is a difference between the verses cited. The verse from J onah is part of a narrative included in the book, while the verse from Joel is a verse of actual prophecy.

What is important is not the external expressions of penitence, but rather the inner movement within the soul, and the reflection of these feelings in our future actions.
Fasting and sackcloth are, nevertheless, important. We are not always in control of our feelings, and cannot necessarily generate genuine f eelings of repentance at will. Fasting, sackcloth, and the other measures mentioned above can create an atmosphere that inspires the arousal of our emotions.

Adding concepts of relevance to his community.

As mentioned in Chapter 1, Halachot 1-4, this is the goal of all public fasts.

A chazan is not considered a mere functionary. Rather, since he is the leader of prayer, it is hoped that he will motivate all the members of the community to sincere prayer. Moreover, his personal merits can influence the standing of the community as a whole and cause their prayers to be acceptable more readily.

Since he is the wisest and most distinguished member of the community, it would be appropriate f or him to lead the prayers.

Compare to Hilchot Tefillah 8:11, where the Rambam mentions who should be chosen as a chazan for the daily prayers:
We should appoint as a leader of communal prayer, the person of the greatest stature in the community with regard to wisdom
and deed. lf he is an elder, this is very praiseworthy. An effort
should be made to appoint a person ... whose voice is sweet and
who reads [the Bible] frequently.
In his Commentary on the Mishnah, Ta’anit 2:2, the Rambam writes that the qualifications of a chazan on these communal fast days are the same as those that apply every day, except for two factors: on a fast day the chazan must have children, and “his house must be empty.” The meaning of the latter phrase is explained below.

Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah, ibid. The Rambam’s intent appears to be that unless a person is used to praying or speaking before a community, the responsibility may unnerve him and, despite all his other qualifications, he may not perform his role effectively.

Because of additional passages added on fast days, it is desirable that he be familiar, not only with the usual prayer service, but with the entire Bible, so that he will not err when adding the special blessings mentioned in Halachot 5-14.
The Mishnah, Ta’anit 2:2, lists as one of the qualifications f or leading these prayer services that “his house is empty.” Ta’anit 16b offers two interpretations of tbat phrase. The Rambam understands that they are not contradictory and quotes them both as requirements. The first is:

His need will make his prayers more sincere.

and he will therefore have a personal interest that the rains come.
The second interpretation of “his house is empty” is that:

This is required so that the congregation would accept him as the leader of prayer. Even when his own conduct is above reproach, if his children or the other members of his household are not virtuous, the community will not accept him.
The Rambam (interpreting Ta’anit 16b) derives the concept that not only the chazan himself, but also his household, must be virtuous from the Mishnah’s association of the two qualifications, “he must have children and his house must be empty.” According to the first interpretation, that fact that the person has children makes his need a matter of greater concern. Similarly, according to the second interpretation, the fact that his virtues are emulated by the members of his household increases the public’s appreciation of his own character (Kinat Eliyahu).

Similarly, although at present his conduct may be impeccable, if he had acted in an undesirable manner previously, there will be members of the community who will not accept him.

The fact that he possesses the above virtues should not lead him to pride.

and thus they will all join together with him in prayer

Our translation of נעימה as referring to the chazan’s voice is based on the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah (ibid.).

When a chazan’s voice is pleasant, the congregation is more motivated to join with him in prayer. See, however, the commentary of the Moznaim edition of Hilchot Tefillah 8:11, which explains that although a pleasant voice is a desirable quality f or a chazan, the other virtues mentioned are more important.

The mishnah (Ta’anit 2:2) that mentions the qualifications of a chazan mentions that he should be an elder, but the baraita (Ta’anit 16a-b) that explains these qualities in greater detail does not mention that f actor.

The Tur ( Orach Chayim 579) maintains that changes are made in the previous blessing, S’lach lanu, as well. To the usual text of that blessing, we add the confessional prayers recited on Yom Kippur.

Go’el Yisrael, “the Redeemer of Israel,” is the seventh blessing of the Shemoneh Esreh. Instead of reciting that blessing in its usual manner, the f ollowing additions should be made.

Verses recalling God’s remembrance of the Jewish people. (See Hilchot Shofar 3:8-9.)

Verses recalling the unique influence of the shofar. (See Hilchot Shofar, ibid.)

l.e., the chazan does not recite the same verses that are recited in the Rosh HaShanah prayers, but different verses, more appropriate to the present circumstances.

I.e., according to the Rambam, there is no set text for these prayers, and their text is chosen by the chazan.

This is the text of the blessing Go’el Yisrael that is recited every day.

I.e., at the binding of Isaac.

I.e., according to the Rambam, there is no set text for the main body of these six blessings. Instead, it must be chosen by the chazan. The conclusions f or each of these blessings are listed in the halachot that follow.

As mentioned above, f or this reason it is necessary that the chazan be familiar with the entire Bible.

There they prayed to be saved from their Egyptian pursuers. (See Exodus 14:15 and Rashi’s commentary.)

Rashi, Ta’anit 15a, explains that this conclusion is appropriate because after the many years of exile in Egypt, the J ews despaired of being redeemed and considered themselves to have been f orgotten by God.
This differs from the conclusion of the Zichronot blessing on Rosh HaShanah, which is “ ... who remembers the covenant.” Significantly, even the Tur (Orach Chayim 579) and the authorities who diff er with the Rambam and maintain that the six passages mentioned in Halachah 5 f orm the body of these six blessings agree with the Rambam concerning the conclusion of this blessing.
See also Rashi (Ta’anit 15a), who explains the connection between each of the blessings and the correspondent passage of these six.

This refers to Joshua’s prayers that he be able to conquer Jericho. That city fell after the people encircled it blowing the shofar.

This is the conclusion of the Shofarot blessing on Rosh HaShanah, according to the Rambam. The Tur has a different text in both places. See note 14.

This refers to Samuel’s prayer that the Jews be rescued from the Philistines. (See I Samuel 7:8-10.)

The verses cited in the previous note speak of Samuel “crying out to God.”

This refers to Elijah’s confrontation with the prophets of Baal. Elijah prayed to God to accept his offering. Afterwards, he also prayed on Mount Carmel for rain. (See I Kings, Chapter 18.)

Despite the use of this conclusion f or one of the blessings of the daily Shemoneh Esreh, it is also employed here.

After fleeing from the fulfillment of the mission which God had assigned him, Jonah was thrown to the sea and swallowed by a large fish. Out of the fish’s belly, he called out in prayer to God. (See Jonah, Chapter 2.)

Jonah began his prayer, “1 cried out to God in my distress and He heard me.”

Rashi, Ta’anit 15a, explains that this refers to David’s prayer, II Samuel 21:1, after the land suffered a famine for three successive years. Solomon’s prayer refers to the prayer he uttered at the dedication of the Temple, I Kings 8:22-53, in which he beseeched God to hear the prayers of the Jews in their time of need.

Although King David and King Solomon preceded Elijah and Jonah chronologically, the prayers of the f ormer are chosen as the subject for this concluding blessing, because the intent of their prayers resembles that of the people praying in these communal fasts, that God have mercy on His people and on His holy land in a time of distress (Tosafot, Ta’anit 16b).

The Rambam emphasizes this point, because when these blessings are recited in the Temple, the people respond in a different manner, as explained in Halachah 15.

See Hilchot Berachot 1:13-14.

F or the seventh blessing, beginning the count from the first blessing added to the Shemoneh Esreh. This is the f ourteenth blessing recited in this service.

This is the usual manner in which we begin the eighth blessing of the Shemoneh Esreh. lt is the blessing that f ollows Go’el Yisrael, the blessing in which we begin to make additions to the Shemoneh Esreh.

without further additions. The commentaries note that it appears that the Rambam does not require recitation of the prayer Anenu, which is recited on all communal fasts.

The Maggid Mishneh notes that it appears that the Rambam’s intent is that the trumpets are sounded only once, after the conclusion of the Shemoneh Esreh. Seemingly, the Rambam does not require the trumpets to be sounded after every blessing when these prayers are recited outside the Temple Mount. In contrast, the Tur—and to all indications, also the Shulchan Aruch ( Orach Chayim 579:2)—make such a requirement.
The source f or this difference of opinion is the interpretation of the phrase in the Mishnah, Ta’anit 2:5, “This was not our custom except at the eastern gate of the Temple Mount.” According to the Rambam, this refers to both matters mentioned in the Mishnah: the responses to the blessings and the sounding of the trumpets. In contrast, the Tur explains that it ref ers only to the responses to the blessings.

Outside the Temple Mount. The order of prayer there is described in the following halachot.

This halachah is based on the Mishnah, Ta’anit 2:5, and a baraita, Ta’anit 16b. The Rambam’s text of that Mishnah states “at the eastern gates.” In his Commentary on the Mishnah, the Rambam states that this refers to “the eastern gate to the Temple Mount and the gate to the Temple Courtyard;”
In his notes on that commentary, Rav Kapach mentions that the above words were written over others that had been blotted out. Thus, it appears that the Rambam changed his mind several times about this matter.
The eastern gate of the Temple Mount faced the Mount of Olives. All the eastern gates of the Temple complex were aligned in a straight line, so that one could proceed directly to the Holy of Holies.

reciting all the blessings mentioned above.

The first of the special additions to the blessings

The latter phrase literally means “from world to world.” Berachot 54a relates that this addition was made to all the blessings in the Temple to emphasize the existence of the World-to-Come.

This, rather than Amen, was the customary response to blessings recited in the Temple. (See Ta’anit 16b.)

Although the word chazan is used, the intent is not the leader of the prayers.

This expression, a quote from Ta’anit 2:5, appears to indicate that the priests would blow the trumpets. This is borne out by Numbers 10:8, “The priests, Aaron’s descendants, will sound the trumpets. This will be an eternal law f or future generations.” See also the Sefer HaChinuch (Mitzvah 384) and Hilchot Klei HaMikdash 3:5. Outside the Temple premises, however, the trumpets did not have to be sounded by the priests.

As the Rambam explains in Halachah 17, the repetition of the phrase “Sound a teki’ah” implies that a series teki’ah, teru’ah, teki’ah is sounded.

Rabbenu Nissim explains that this phrase is repeated to emphasize that the trumpets are being sounded in response to this plea f or Divine mercy, and not in response to the people’s statement, “Blessed be His name and the glory of His kingdom for ever and ever.”

“Sons of Aaron” is analogous to “priests.”

The repetition of the phrase “Sound a teru’ah,” implies that a series teru’ah, teki’ah, teru’ah is sounded.

The Ra’avad differs with the Rambam on this point, explaining that when the announcement “Sound a teki’ah” was made, only a teki’ah was sounded. Conversely, when the announcement “Sound a teru’ah” was made, only a teru’ah was sounded. The B’nei Binyamin (based on his text of the Tosefta, Ta’anit 1:10) mentions a third opinion, that f or all seven times, they blew a series teki’ah, teru’ah, teki’ah.

See Chapter 1, Halachah 4.

I.e., throughout Eretz Yisrael and also in the diaspora, not only on the Temple Mount as in the previous halachot.

This emphasizes the theme expressed several times in this text, that distress and relief from it are dependent on our virtuous conduct or lack thereof.
Significantly, Ta’anit 16a gives two rationales for this custom: the one quoted by the Rambam, and a second one, “so that the dead will intercede on our behalf.” That passage continues, “What is the difference between these two opinions? A non-Jewish cemetery.’’
Rashi explains that in a non-J ewish cemetery, there is no concept of the dead interceding on our behalf. Nevertheless, even such a place is sufficient to communicate the message “Unless you return .... “ In light of this, the Lechem Mishneh mentions that if there is no Jewish cemetery available, the community may go to a non-Jewish cemetery. Significantly, the Ramah (Orach Chayim 579:3) quotes this as halachah. (Note, however, the Mishnah Berurah 579:4.)

This includes all the thirteen fasts declared because of rain and all communal fasts decreed because of the distressing circumstances mentioned in Chapter 2. As the Rambam explicitly states (Hilchot Nesiat Kapayim 14:2), Ne’ilah is not recited on commemorative fasts such as Tish’ah B’ A v or the Seventeenth of Tammuz. It is, however, recited on Yom Kippur.

The word Ne’ilah means “closing.” It refers to “the closing of the gates of heaven for the setting sun” (Hilchot Tefillah 1:7). This service is added just before sunset. Thus, on communal fasts, four services are recited.

See Chapter 1, Halachah 16.

In all three instances, a similar amount of rain is required. Parched earth does not allow the water to penetrate easily. Conversely, cultivated earth is broken up and thus allows f or greater penetration.