A Lenient Ruling of Rama
I recall learning as far back as elementary school that if one forgot to recite HaMelech HaMishpat during the Aseret Yemei Teshuva one need not repeat the Amidah. The well-known ruling of the Rama (Orach Chaim 118:1 and 582:1) is based on the idea that since one in any event mentions the word Melech when reciting Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U’Mishpat, the formula of HaMelech Hamishpat is not an absolute necessity. This contrasts with HaMelech HaKadosh, where during the Aseret Yemei Teshuvah one must repeat the Amidah if he forgot and recited HaKeil HaKadosh.
Rav Ovadia Yosef’s Approach
This well-know ruling, though, is based on the Rama, the major halachic authority for Ashkenazic Jews. May Sephardic Jews rely on this approach? Chacham Ovadia (Teshuvot Yechave Da’at 1:57) responds with an emphatic no! He begins by listing the overwhelming majority of Rishonim who reject this approach. These include the Rambam (Hilchot Tefillah 10:13), the venerated ancient Siddur of Rav Sa’adia Gaon (pages 18 and 24), Rosh (Brachot 1:16), Machzor Vitry (number 90 and number 327) and Ritva (Rosh Hashanah 34a). Maran Rav Yosef Karo (Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 118:1 and 582:1), in turn, rules in accordance with these many Rishonim.
Rav Ovadia cites Rabbeinu Mano’ah (Sefer HaMenucha page 67), who notes that there is a world of difference between “HaMelech HaMishpat,” the King of Justice and “Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U’Mishpat,” the King Who loves when His creations act with justice and fairness. Talmidei Rabbeinu Yonah (Brachot 6b in the pages of the Rif s.v. V’Asiknah) are the sole Rishonim who rule that Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U’Mishpat is an adequate substitution for HaMelech HaMishpat.
Chacham Ovadia acknowledges that the Ashkenazic Acharonim such as the Bach (Orach Chaim 582 s.v. V’Aviezri) and Magen Avraham (118:1) support the Rama’s approach, but notes that the Sephardic Acharonim do not. Rav Yosef presents a list of major Sephardic poskim who uphold the ruling of Maran Rav Yosef Karo. These include the Pri Chadash, Nehar Shalom, Ma’amar Mordechai, Maran HaChida, Rav Hayyim Palagi (Moed L’Chol Chai 13:28) and the Sdei Chemed (Teshuvot Ohr Li number 29).
The Ben Ish Chai’s Approach and Rav Ovadia’s Response
It would seem to be obvious that a Sephardic Jew should follow the ruling of Maran in this instance, but the leading 19th-century Sephardic posek, the Ben Ish Chai (year one Nitzavim, paragraph 19), does not subscribe to this approach. He argues that although Maran requires even one who said Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U’Mishpat to repeat the Amidah, since the Rama does not require the repetition it is a situation of safeik brachot (uncertainty as to whether a bracha should be recited).
Thus, even a Sephardic Jew should not repeat the Amidah lest one recite an unnecessary bracha. Ben Ish Chai insists that this rule applies even when it runs counter to an explicit ruling of Maran! The Kaf HaChaim (582:2) rules in accordance with the Ben Ish Chai.
Rav Ovadia Yosef most definitely considers the principle of safeik brachot l’hakel in his ruling. In fact, it is a dominant theme in his rulings. However, he insists that in our situation it does not apply. He notes that this ruling cannot apply in our case since if one continues the Amidah after saying Melech Oheiv Tzedakah U’Mishpat one will be reciting an entire string of unnecessary brachot, according to the majority of Rishonim and Maran Rav Yosef Karo.
Moreover, the rule of safeik brachot l’hakeil does not apply when there is a minhag, prevailing custom. Chacham Ovadia presents a most dramatic incident that he heard from an eyewitness. The eyewitness was present when the Ben Ish Chai presented this ruling to the community. He relates that upon hearing the Ben Ish Chai state this ruling, the av beit din (chief justice of the Baghdad rabbinical court) of Baghdad leaped to his feet and proclaimed that this runs counter to the prevalent minhag in Baghdad!
Accordingly, Rav Ovadia argues that the principle of safeik brachot l’hakeil does not apply in our case since it does not apply in case there is a minhag to recite the bracha. The story about the Baghdad av beit din confirms the existence of a minhag to follow the ruling of Maran Rav Yosef Karo in this situation.
The Rulings of Rav Messas and Rav Eliyahu
Ribi Shalom Massas (cited in Rav Mordechai Lebhar’s Magein Avot 582:1) disagrees with this ruling of Rav Yosef. Rav Lebhar notes that the minhag among Moroccan Jews follows that of the Ben Ish Chai and Kaf HaChaim, thereby eliminating an important prong of Rav Ovadia’s argument.
Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (in his Siddur Kol Eliyahu) also rules in accordance with the Ben Ish Chai. This is hardly surprising, since he is well-known for following in the footsteps of the Ben Ish Chai.
Conclusion
Thus, what I was taught in elementary that the Amidah need not be repeated if one forgot to say HaMelech HaMishpat as long as the word Melech was said is appropriate for Ashkenazim and Moroccan Jews. Yemenites should unquestionably follow the ruling of the Rambam and Maran Rav Yosef Karo and repeat the Amidah if they omitted HaMelech HaMishpat.
For other Sephardic/Eastern Jews the matter remains unresolved. It seems that Rav Eli Mansour1 sets forth the most reasonable approach, seeing that it is an unresolved issue. In case one forgot HaMelech HaMishpat he should repeat the Amidah but stipulate that according to the view (Talmidei Rabbeinu Yonah, Rama, Ben Ish, Rav Messas and Rav Eliyahu) that he has fulfilled his obligation of prayer, the extra Amidah should be regarded as a voluntary prayer. Indeed, this is the approach set forth even by Rav Ovadia Yosef (op. cit. and Yalkut Yosef Orach Chaim 582:11).
By Rabbi Haim Jachter
Rabbi Haim Jachter is the spiritual leader of Congregation Shaarei Orah, the Sephardic Congregation of Teaneck. He also serves as a rebbe at Torah Academy of Bergen County and a dayan on the Beth Din of Elizabeth.
