Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

May 25, 2022 | 讻状讚 讘讗讬讬专 转砖驻状讘 | TODAY'S DAF: Yevamot 79

The Purpose of Chazarat Hashatz – Gefet #14

Chazarat Hashatz is a tefillah that takes on a special meaning during the Yamim Noraim. However, on regular weekdays, the attitude towards it is less sympathetic.聽

This question is asked of the Rambam, and his answer echoes the tension found in our sugiya, which deals with the purpose of Chazarat Hashatz.

The Mishna on daf 33b brings an argument between Rabban Gamliel and the rabbis:

讻砖诐 砖砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 讞讬讬讘 – 讻讱 讻诇 讬讞讬讚 讜讬讞讬讚 讞讬讬讘. 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专: 砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 讛专讘讬诐 讬讚讬 讞讜讘转谉.

 

The gemara on daf 34b clarifies this argument and raises this great tension, and the far-fetched ideas of each position:

转诇诪讜讚 讘讘诇讬 诪住讻转 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讚祝 诇讚 注诪讜讚 讘

讻砖诐 砖砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 讞讬讬讘 讻讱 讻诇 讬讞讬讚 讜讬讞讬讚 讜讻讜’. 转谞讬讗, 讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇: 诇讚讘专讬讱, 诇诪讛 爪讘讜专 诪转驻诇诇讬谉? 讗诪专 诇讛诐: 讻讚讬 诇讛住讚讬专 砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 转驻诇转讜. 讗诪专 诇讛诐 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇: 诇讚讘专讬讻诐, 诇诪讛 砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 讬讜专讚 诇驻谞讬 讛转讬讘讛? 讗诪专讜 诇讜: 讻讚讬 诇讛讜爪讬讗 讗转 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬. 讗诪专 诇讛诐: 讻砖诐 砖诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 – 讻讱 诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 讛讘拽讬.

 

The gemara shows how according to Rabban Gamliel, a person’s individual tefillah is secondary 鈥 the main tefillah is the tefillah of the shaliach tzibbur, and the whole purpose of the individual’s tefilah is to allow the shaliach tzibbur to prepare for his tefillah. In the rabbis’ opinion, Chazarat Hashatz is only needed for those who are not familiar enough with the tefillah, but one who knows it does not need this at all. In the continuation of the sugiya on daf 35a, it states that the rabbis agree with Rabban Gamliel with regards to the brachot of Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur:

 

讻讬 住诇讬拽 专讘讬 讗讘讗 诪讬诪讬 驻讬专砖讛: 诪讜讚讬诐 讞讻诪讬诐 诇专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘讘专讻讜转 砖诇 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讜砖诇 讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐.

 

In the continuation of daf 35a, the gemara goes back to clarify the position of Rabban Gamliel on regular days, and this is how the masechet ends:

 

讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专 注讜讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讞住讬讚讗: 驻讜讟专 讛讬讛 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗驻讬诇讜 注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转. 讜诇讗 诪讬讘注讬讗 讛谞讬 讚拽讬讬诪讬 讛讻讗? 讗讚专讘讗, 讛谞讬 – 讗谞讬住讬, 讛谞讬 – 诇讗 讗谞讬住讬, 讚转谞讬 讗讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讘谞讬诪讬谉 讘专 讞讬讬讗: 注诐 砖讗讞讜专讬 讻讛谞讬诐 – 讗讬谞谉 讘讻诇诇 讘专讻讛! 讗诇讗: 讻讬 讗转讗 专讘讬谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬注拽讘 讘专 讗讬讚讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讞住讬讚讗: 诇讗 驻讟专 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗诇讗 注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转, 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 – 诪砖讜诐 讚讗谞讬住讬 讘诪诇讗讻讛, 讗讘诇 讘注讬专 – 诇讗. 讛讚专谉 注诇讱 讬讜诐 讟讜讘 讜住诇讬拽讗 诇讛 诪住讻转 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛.

 

Rav Acha bar Avira expands the opinion of Rabban Gamliel and says that not only does Rabban Gamliel allow the individual to fulfil his obligation through the tefillah of the shaliach tzibbur in shul, but, even someone who is not in shul 鈥 the people who are in the fields, can fulfil their obligation through the tefillah of the shaliach tzibbur! The gemara explains that this exemption of Rabban Gamliel is specifically for the people who are in the fields, but not for those who are in the cities and just did not go to shul. A person who could have gone to shul but didn’t go will not fulfil his obligation through the tefillah of the shaliach tzibbur, however, one who, due to circumstances beyond his control (work in the fields) couldn’t go, will fulfil his obligation this way. Rav Acha’s diyyuk comes from the laws of Birkat Cohanim, where it is explicitly stated that the people who are in the fields fulfil their obligation, however, if someone is inside the shul but does not turn towards the Cohanim, he does not receive the bracha. Rashi fills in this information for us:

专砖”讬 诪住讻转 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讚祝 诇讛 注诪讜讚 讗

讗讬谞谉 讘讻诇诇 讘专讻讛 – 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转 讘讻诇诇 讘专讻讛, 讛谞讬 讚诪爪讜 诇诪讬转讬 拽诪讬 讻讛谞讬诐, 讜讬驻谞讜 讻讛谞讬诐 讗诇讬讛诐 讜讬讘专讻讜诐, 讜讛诐 诇讗 讘讗讜 – 讗讬谞谉 讘讻诇诇 讘专讻讛.:

The halacha was paskined according to the rabbis’ opinion regarding regular days, and like Rabban Gamliel, with whom the rabbis agree with regards to the Yamim Noraim. The uncomfortable feeling towards Chazarat Hashatz is understandable in light of this gemara, and is what led to the attempt to abolish Chazarat Hashatz in the time of the Rambam. This is recorded by the Beit Yosef:

讘讬转 讬讜住祝 讗讜专讞 讞讬讬诐 住讬诪谉 拽讻讚 讗讜转 讙 讚”讛 讜讻转讘 讛”专

讙 讜讻转讘 讛”专 讚讜讚 讗讘讜讚专讛诐 (注诪’ 拽讬讞) 砖谞砖讗诇 讛专诪讘”诐 (驻讗专 讛讚讜专 住讬’ 拽诪讞) 拽讛诇 砖讛转驻诇诇讜 讜讻讜诇诐 讘拽讬讗讬诐 讘转驻讬诇讛 讗诐 讬专讚 砖诇讬讞 爪讬讘讜专 诇驻谞讬 讛转讬讘讛 讜讬讞讝讜专 讛转驻讬诇讛 讘拽讜诇 专诐 讜讛砖讬讘 讛讜讗讬诇 讜转拽谞讜 讞讻诪讬诐 砖讬专讚 砖诇讬讞 爪讬讘讜专 诇驻谞讬 讛转讬讘讛 诇讛讜爪讬讗 讗转 诪讬 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 诇讗 转讛讬讛 讞讝专转 讛砖诇讬讞 爪讬讘讜专 讘专讻讛 诇讘讟诇讛 讻诇诇 诪驻谞讬 注讬拽专 讛转拽谞讛 讜讗祝 注”驻 砖诇讗 讬讛讬讛 讘拽讛诇 诪讬 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讻诪讜 砖转拽谞讜 讛拽讬讚讜砖 讘讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 (驻住讞讬诐 拽讗.) 讜讛讬讛 注讬拽专 讝讛 诪驻谞讬 讛讗讜专讞讬诐 讜谞转讞讬讬讘讜 诇讗诪专讜 讘讻诇 讘转讬 讻谞住讬讜转 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 砖诐 讗讜专讞讬诐 讜讻诪讜 砖转拽谞讜 讘专讻讛 讗讞转 诪注讬谉 砖讘注 讘砖讘讬诇 讛诪讗讞专讬诐 诇讘讜讗 讘讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 (砖讘转 讻讚:) 讜谞转讞讬讬讘讜 诇讗诪专讛 转诪讬讚 讜讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讛讬讜 砖诐 讻诇 讛拽讛诇 讜讻谉 讻诇 讚讘专 讛谞转拽谉 讘砖讘讬诇 讚讘专 讗讞专 讗讬谉 注谞讬谞讜 砖诇讗 谞注砖讬转 讛转拽谞讛 讛讛讬讗 注讚 砖讬讛讬讛 砖诐 讗讜转讜 讛讚讘专 砖谞转拽谞讛 讘砖讘讬诇讜 专拽 注谞讬谞讜 砖谞注砖讛 讛转拽谞讛 讛讛讬讗 注诇 讻诇 驻谞讬诐 讙讝讬专讛 砖诪讗 讬讛讬讛 砖诐 讗讜转讜 讛讚讘专 砖谞转拽谞讛 讘砖讘讬诇讜 讜爪专讬讱 砖讬讜讘谉 讝讛 讛注谞讬谉 砖讗诐 诇讗 讻谉 讛讬讜 讛讞讻诪讬诐 谞讜转谞讬诐 讚讘专讬讛诐 诇砖讬注讜专讬诐 讜讛讬讛 爪专讬讱 讘讻诇 转驻讬诇讛 诇讞驻砖 讻诇 讗讬砖 讜讗讬砖 砖讘讘讬转 讛讻谞住转 讗诐 讛讜讗 讘拽讬 讗诐 诇讗 注”讻:

 

The Rambam paskins decisively that despite the familiarity of the people in the shul with the tefillah, Chazarat Hashatz must be preserved, as this is a takkana which is always relevant since there can always be one person who is not familiar with the tefillah. The Rambam says that in order to abolish it in that specific place, we would have to go person to person and check their familiarity with the tefillah.

In addition to these words of the Rambam, from the Tosfot which we are about to read, it seems that there is another halachic reason to preserve Chazarat Hashatz, even when we are part of a community that is well-educated and knows the tefillah.

Tosfot on daf 34b discuss the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, which, as we have seen, was not paskined as halacha, and surprisingly, bring the following psak which is based on Rabban Gamliel’s opinion about weekdays:

讻讱 诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 讛讘拽讬 – 诪讻讗谉 驻住拽 讘讛”讙 讚讬讞讬讚 砖讟注讛 讜诇讗 讛讝讻讬专 砖诇 专讗砖 讞讚砖 讬讻讜讬谉 诇讘讜 诇转驻诇转讜 砖诇 砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 诪转讞诇讛 注讚 住讜祝 讜讬讜爪讗 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讛讜讗 讘拽讬 讜讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诪讻讗谉 讚讛讗 诪住拽讬谞谉 专砖讘”讙 讗讜诪专 讗讬谞讜 诪讜爪讬讗 讗诇讗 注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转 讚讗谞讬住讬 讘诪诇讗讻讛 讜讗讬谞谉 讬讻讜诇讬谉 诇讛住讚讬专 转驻诇转诐 讗讘诇 讚注讬专 诇讗.

 

Tosfot begin by bringing the opinion of the Behag and asking about it. The Behag paskins that a person who makes the sort of mistake where he would have to repeat the

tefillah, (such as forgetting 讬注诇讛 讜讬讘讜讗 in Shacharit or Mincha of Rosh Chodesh), can actually fulfil his obligation by listening to the shaliach tzibbur, instead of actually repeating the tefillah. Tosfot are surprised by this psak 鈥 even if we paskin like the Behag, according to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, a person standing in the shul but who doesn’t daven properly can’t fulfil his obligation through the shaliach tzibbur, rather only one in circumstances beyond his control! Tosfot suggest an answer based on the sugiya that ends the masechet, and Rashi’s words on it:

 

讜诪讬讛讜 讘拽讜谞讟专住 诪砖诪注 诇拽诪谉 砖专讜爪讛 诇驻专砖 讘砖诇讗 讻讜讜谉 诇讘讜 诇讘讛讻”谞 讜诇讗 砖诪注 转驻诇讛 讜讻谉 诪砖诪注 讚讜诪讬讗 讚讛讛讬讗 讚讘专讻转 讻讛谞讬诐 讜诇驻讬专讜砖 讝讛 诪爪讬谞讜 诇诪讬诪专 讚讘爪讘讜专 讛讬讻讗 讚砖诪注讜 讬讜爪讗讬谉 .

 

Tosfot distinguish between a person who does not daven on purpose 鈥 someone who is in the city but doesn’t go inside to daven, or someone who is in shul but doesn’t turn towards the Cohanim, and a person who is out in the fields and is considered to be in a situation beyond his control. A person who tried to daven but made a mistake is like the people in the fields, as he did not do this on purpose. He is not exactly in a situation beyond his control, but is not considered to be a sinner, like one who did not have kavana purposefully and did not want to hear the tefillah. Tosfot bring a proof for this idea from a sugiya in Masechet Brachot:

 

讜讻谉 诪砖诪注 讘驻专拽 转驻诇转 讛砖讞专 (讘专讻讜转 讚祝 讻讟.) 讚讗诪专 专讘 讗住讬 讟注讛 讜诇讗 讛讝讻讬专 讙讘讜专讜转 讙砖诪讬诐 讘转讞讬讬转 讛诪转讬诐 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖讗诇讛 讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 讗讬谉 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讜讻讜’ 诪讬转讬讘讬 讟注讛 讜诇讗 讛讝讻讬专 讻讜’ 砖讗诇讛 讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讻讜’ 讜诪砖谞讬 讛讗 讘讬讞讬讚 讛讗 讘爪讘讜专 讗讬 讛讻讬 诪驻谞讬 砖砖讜诪注讛 诪砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 诪讬讘注讬 诇讬讛 讜诪住讬拽 讗讬讚讬 讜讗讬讚讬 讘讬讞讬讚 讛讗 讚讗讬讚讻专 拽讜讚诐 砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 讛讗 讚诇讗 讗讚讻专 拽讜讚诐 砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 诪砖诪注 讚讘爪讘讜专 讬讜爪讗 注诇 讬讚讬 砖”爪 讜讗驻讬’ 诇驻讬 诪讛 砖驻讬专砖 注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转 砖砖讜诪注讬谉 诪砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 讬讜爪讗讬谉 讗讘诇 讚注讬专 诇讗 讬砖 诇讞诇拽 讘讬谉 讛讬讻讗 讚讛转驻诇诇 讜讟注讛 诇讛讬讻讗 讚诇讗 讛转驻诇诇 讻诇诇 [讜注”注 转讜住’ 讘专讻讜转 讻讟: 讚”讛 讟注讛].:

By making the connection to the sugiya in Brachot, Tosfot expand the cases in which one can make use of the shaliach tzibbur. Even mistakes when mentioning rain and asking for rain can be rectified through listening to the shaliach tzibbur. In the sugiya in Brachot, Tosfot bring the opinion of Rabbi Meir, one of the Tosafot, who says that the level of the mistake will determine the ability to have the obligation be fulfilled by the shaliach tzibbur.

转讜住驻讜转 诪住讻转 讘专讻讜转 讚祝 讻讟 注诪讜讚 讘

讟注讛 讜诇讗 讛讝讻讬专 砖诇 专讗砖 讞讚砖 讘注讘讜讚讛 讞讜讝专 诇注讘讜讚讛 – 讜讘讛诇讻讜转 讙讚讜诇讜转 驻讬’ 讚讜拽讗 讘讬讞讬讚 讗讘诇 讘爪讘讜专 讗讬谞讜

讞讜讝专 诪驻谞讬 砖砖讜诪注讛 诪砖”爪 诪讬讛讜 爪专讬讱 诇讚拽讚拽 诪驻讬 讛讞讝谉 讻诇 讗讜转 讜讗讜转 砖诇 转驻诇讛 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讛讜讗 讘拽讬 讚讛讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 (驻”讚 讚祝 诇讚:) 讻砖诐 砖诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讻讱 诪讜爪讬讗 讛讘拽讬 讜讗祝 注诇 讙讘 讚讗诪专讬谞谉 讛转诐 诇讗 驻讟专 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗诇讗 讛注诐 砖讘砖讚讜转 诪砖讜诐 讚讗谞讬住讬 讜讟专讬讚讬 讗讘诇 讟注讛 诇讗 讬砖 诇讜诪专 讛讬讬谞讜 砖诇讗 讛转驻诇诇 讻诇诇 讗讘诇 讛讬讻讗 砖讛转驻诇诇 讻讘专 诇讗 讞砖讘讬谞谉 诇讬讛 讻讗讬诇讜 诇讗 讛转驻诇诇 讻诇诇 讜讛”讛 诇讻诇 讚讘专 砖诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讗讬 讛讚专 砖诪注 诇讬讛 诪砖诇讜讞讗 讚爪讘讜专讗 诪专讗砖 讜注讚 住讜祝 谞驻讬拽 讜讛专讘 专”诪 驻住拽 讚讜拽讗 砖讻讞 诇讛讝讻讬专 砖诇 专”讞 讗讘诇 砖讻讞 讘专讻讛 砖诇诪讛 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讜讗讬谞讜 讬讜爪讗 讘砖诪讬注转讜 诪砖诇讬讞 爪讘讜专 (讜注”注 转讜住’ 专”讛 讚祝 诇讚: 讚”讛 讻讱).

 

Rabbi Meir claims that if one makes a mistake which causes an entire bracha to be lost, this is a problematic person in terms of his kavana, and he is not considered unintentional enough to be considered like the people in the fields who can fulfil their obligation through the shaliach tzibbur. However, a mistake in the middle of the bracha, like 讬注诇讛 讜讬讘讜讗 and asking for rain, allows one to be considered a person in circumstances beyond his control, and not like someone who did not have the right kavana. This is how Tosfot explain the position of the Behag which is based on the opinion of Rabban Gamliel. However, there is a big question which Tosfot did not address at all, which is brought in the Beit Yosef:

 

讘讬转 讬讜住祝 讗讜专讞 讞讬讬诐 住讬诪谉 拽讻讚 讗讜转 讬 讚”讛 诪讬 砖砖讻讞

讜转诪讛谞讬 注诇 讛转讜住驻讜转 讜讛专讗”砖 砖讛讘讬讗讜 专讗讬讛 诪诪住讻转 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讚讛讗 诇讗 讗诪专 讘住讜祝 专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讚讻砖诐 砖讛讜讗 诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讻讱 讛讜讗 诪讜爪讬讗 讗转 讛讘拽讬 讗诇讗 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讜驻诇讬讙讬 专讘谞谉 注诇讬讛 讜讗诪专讬 讚讗讬谞讜 驻讜讟专

讗诇讗 讗转 砖讗讬谞讜 讘拽讬 讗讘诇 诇讗 诇讘拽讬 讜讗讬驻住讬拽讗 讛诇讻转讗 讻专讘谞谉 讘砖讗专 讬诪讜转 讛砖谞讛 讜讻专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讘专讗砖 讛砖谞讛 讜讬讜诐 讛讻驻讜专讬诐 讜讻讬讜谉 讚讘砖讗专 讬诪讜转 讛砖谞讛 拽讬讬诪讬谞谉 讛讻讬 讛讬讻讬 诪讬讬转讜 专讗讬讛 诪讚讘专讬 专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讚诇讬转 讛诇讻转讗 讻讜讜转讬讛?

How could the Behag paskin like this as his psak is based on the opinion of Rabban Gamliel whom we do not go by in this halacha? A person who makes a mistake in his tefillah is certainly considered someone who is familiar with the tefillah, otherwise he would not have been able to daven quietly on his own! Therefore, it is only according to the opinion of Rabban Gamliel that this person can fulfil his obligation through the shaliach tzibbur, as we are talking about regular weekdays and Rosh Chodesh! The Beit Yosef makes the following suggestion:

讜讗驻砖专 讚讛讻讬 拽讗诪专讬 讻讬讜谉 讚专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 住讘专 讚砖诇讬讞 爪讬讘讜专 驻讜讟专 讗转 讛讘拽讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专 讚诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 专讘谞谉 注诇讬讛 讗诇讗 讘砖诇讗 讛转驻诇诇 讻诇诇 讗讘诇 讗诐 讛转驻诇诇 讜讟注讛 诪讜讚讜 诇专讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讚砖诇讬讞 爪讬讘讜专 驻讜讟专讜:

 

The Beit Yosef suggests that this is another point of agreement between Rabban Gamliel and the rabbis. This is also how the Beit Yosef paskins the halacha in the Shulchan Aruch:

 

砖讜诇讞谉 注专讜讱 讗讜专讞 讞讬讬诐 讛诇讻讜转 转驻诇讛 住讬诪谉 拽讻讚 住注讬祝 讬

诪讬 砖砖讻讞 讜诇讗 讗诪专 讬注诇讛 讜讬讘讗 讘专”讞 讗讜 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讗讜 讘讻诇 讚讘专 砖爪专讬讱 诇讞讝讜专 讘砖讘讬诇讜, 讬讻讜讬谉 讚注转讜 讟讝] 讜讬砖诪注 诪砖”爪 讻诇 讬”讞 讘专讻讜转 诪专讗砖 讜注讚 住讜祝 讻讗讚诐 砖诪转驻诇诇 诇注爪诪讜; 讜诇讗 讬驻住讬拽 讜诇讗 讬砖讬讞; 讜驻讜住注 讙’ 驻住讬注讜转 诇讗讞讜专讬讜, 讚讻讬讜谉 砖讻讘专 讛转驻诇诇, 讗诇讗 砖砖讻讞 讜诇讗 讛讝讻讬专, 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讛讜讗 讘拽讬, 砖”爪 诪讜爪讬讗讜.

We have therefore seen that there is another need for Chazarat Hashatz, even according to the rabbis 鈥 it is not only to fulfil the obligation of someone who is not familiar with the tefillah, but also of someone who made a mistake. Making mistakes is much more common than someone who is not familiar with the tefillah, even today. This is the other reason for the Rambam’s decision not to abolish Chazarat Hashatz, and there may even be space for Rabban Gamliel here, who points out that the tefillah of the shaliach tzibbur has something which an individual’s tefillah does not.

Rabbanit Yael Shimoni

Rabbanit Shimoni has learned at Migdal Oz, Matan, and the Susi Bradfield Women鈥檚 Institute for Halakhic Leadership at Midreshet Lindenbaum. She holds a BFA from Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design and a BEd in Torah Shebe鈥檃l Peh and Jewish Thought from Herzog College. She is currently studying towards an MA in Jewish Thought Education at Herzog College. Rabbanit Shimoni taught gemara and halakha at Pelech High School and served as a ramit for shana bet at Migdal Oz. She directs Meshivat Nefesh, the online responsa program of the rabbaniyot of Beit Hillel. She is also a plastic artist and member of 鈥淎 Studio of Her Own.
Scroll To Top