If someone davens neitz on Shmini Etzeres and ends up davening with his minyan Musaf quite early. When his wife davens shachris it is then already after her husband davened musaf. Should she say “mashiv haruach u’morid hageshem” already now when she davens shachris? (Perhaps she is nigrer acher her husband in this regard?)

Answer:

This is an interesting question.

In principle, even if a woman davens Shacharis after her husband has davened Mussaf, she should not say mashiv ha-ruach. However, if she (and her husband) have a fixed local shul, she should ensure that she says morid ha-tal in her Shacharis prayer (even in chutz la-aretz, where the general custom is not to do so).

Sources:

Poskim discuss whether or not a person follows his local shul with regard to the recitation of mashiv ha-ruach u-morid ha-geshem, even if he has not yet davened Shacharis.

The Biur Halachah (114, s.v. lo yakdim) explains that where there are two minyanim in a shul, and the first has completed Mussaf before the second has began to daven Shacharis, the second should mention morid ha-tal in Shacharis.

The Biur Halachah adds that even if we say that a second minyan is drawn after the first minyan for purposes of reciting mashiv ha-ruach in the Mussaf prayer (there are opinions that mashiv ha-ruach is recited by the congregation only from the Minchah prayer and on), in the Shacharis prayer mashiv ha-ruach is never recited.

The implication is that this is true even for an individual, who will also not be drawn after his shul for purposes of mashiv ha-ruach in the Shacharis prayer.

However, this ruling is not simple, and a number of authorities write that an individual must follow his local shul, and recite mashiv ha-ruach even in shacharis, if he davens after the local shul has already begun Mussaf (and mashiv ha-ruach has been declared). See in this regard Orchos Chaim (Spinka); Shut Toras Yekusiel, Orach Chaim 37; She’arim Ha-metzuyanim Behalachah 19.

The Tehilla Le-David also assumes this to be the principle halachah, but adds that because one fulfills one’s obligations both ways by mentioning “morid ha-tal,” it is better under these circumstances to say morid ha-tal and not mashiv ha-ruach, to ensure that one fulfills the obligation of prayer either way.

The debate above concerns being drawn after the local shul. It stands to reason that a wife is not drawn in this respect after her husband, as Rav Moshe Feinstein writes (in principle) with regard to accepting Shabbos.

One Response to “Mashiv Ha-Ruach in Shacharis of Simchas Torah”

  1. Thanks for responding. I was curious to know how this question was going to be addressed and which sources would be used.

    Important to note a few things.
    The makor for many of the poskim you mentioned that hold someone should say “mashiv ha-ruach” when davening Shachris in a place where Musaf was already davened and the person heard an announcement for “Mashiv ha-Ruach” is in ShuT Shailas Shalom Siman 197 (see here http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1114&st=&pgnum=383) From this and the poskim you mention possible to say “col sh’cain” that just as the bal goes after the shul so to the isha should go after him. A similar case would be what you mention from R’ Moshe in regards to Kabbolos Shabbos. Although he rules that an isha is not nigrer could be the reasoning wouldn’t apply over here. I’m still in sofek if tefillah (which normally the isha does go “after” her husband) is “better” or “worse” than Kabbolos Shabbos. (The shailo of Kabbolos Shabbos was my first thought over here to draw a similarity.) However it’s important to note that R’ Wosner is cholek on R’ Moshe in this prat and that the isha is nigrer achar the ba’al in regards to Kabbolos Shabbos. Each person can look at the teshuvas for themselves and decide who the halacha is like. L’Maseh I think R’ Moshe is the accepted psak however L’Halacha R’ Wosner has *very* strong points. As well he has the Gedolei Achronim on his side (neither R’ Wosner or R’ Moshe mentioned these achronim.) The Pri Magadim (In OC Siman 261) paskens that the isha is nigrer achar the bal in regards to kabbolos Shabbos. The Aruch HaShulchan also discusses the point and leaves it b’tzrich iyun.

    L’halacha I’m still in sofek, however L’maseh with the point of the Tehillah L’David as well, better for the isha to stick with “morid ha-tal” by shachris.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *