The Seventy Tongues
The pasuk in Parashas Noach states (Bereishis 11:6-9): “And Hashem said: ‘Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is what they begin to do… Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.’ Hashem scattered them from there upon the face of all the earth.”
As the verse states, the Generation of the Dispersion is the origin of the diversity of peoples in the world—of different nations and different tongues. The Midrash (Yalkut, Noach 62) explains further that at the time of the dispersion, Hashem summoned the seventy ministering angels that surround His throne, and told them that the generation will be divided into seventy nations, seventy tongues. Hashem and His angels drew lots to allocate responsibility for the respective nations, and the lot of Hashem fell on Israel.
Thus came into being the different nations of the world, each with its specific nature and language. As the Ramban explains (Bamidbar 11:16), each of the nations carries with it a different psyche, unique dispositions and unique aptitudes. The number of judges on the highest Torah beis din is therefore seventy, because they must encompass the fullest possible range of comprehension and understanding. Even in receiving the Torah, Moshe gathered seventy elders of Israel (Shemos 24:1), “for it is worthy of this complete number that the Shechinah will be enshrined upon them, as is the case for the Divine camp [of ministering angels].”
We thus find that the Torah itself divides into seventy tongues, as Chazal teach: “Each word that came forth from the mouth of Hashem divided into seventy tongues.” The Torah includes seventy faces (Bamidbar Rabba 13:15), each of them opening up a specific grasp and perspective of the Torah, and corresponding to the seventy tongues that were revealed at the time of the Dispersion.
In this article we will discuss the halachic implications of the ‘seventy tongues,’ and of foreign languages in general. When is it permitted to pray in a foreign language? Is it preferable to pray in Hebrew, without understanding the words, or to pray in one’s native language? Is a foreign language acceptable even where it is not a spoken tongue? We will seek to clarify these (and other) issues by studying the Talmudic sugya of using foreign languages.
Reciting Keriyas Shema in Other Languages
The Gemara (Berachos 13a) cites the teaching of a baraisa: “Keriyas Shema must be recited as it is written. This is the opinion of Rebbi. The Chachamim say: [It can be recited] in any language.”
The Gemara explains that this dispute depends on how the verses of Keriyas Shema are interpreted. According to Rebbi, the word vehayu is interpreted to mean that the words of Shema must be recited verbatim. Chachamim, however, base their opinion on the word shema, deriving that Shema can be recited in any language that one ‘hears’ (meaning ‘understands’).
The Rambam (Keriyas Shema 2:10) rules in accordance with Chachamim, adding an important detail: “A person recites the Shema in any language he understands. Somebody reading in any language must ensure that his words are free of mistakes in that tongue, and must use the language with the same precision as in lashon ha-kodesh.” According to the Rambam, one must be careful to use foreign languages with precision, just as one is precise in reading the words of the Holy Tongue.
The Raabad, however, differs in this point: “This is not acceptable, for all languages are interpretation, and who can be precise in interpretation?”
The Ruling of the Mishnah Berurah
The Mishnah Berurah (62:3) rules that one should avoid the use of other languages for Keriyas Shema, and mentions (citing from acharonim) that in our day even the strict halachah opposes the use of languages other than Hebrew.
The reason for this is that there are several words whose precise meaning is unknown, such as the word veshinantam, which refers to teaching, but which Chazal explain to mean acquiring a ‘sharp’ knowledge of the Torah. In addition, he mentions that there are words that do not translate well into other languages, such as the word es (as in es beneichem).
It is interesting to evaluate these points based on the dispute between the Rambam and the Raavad. According to the Rambam, foreign languages mean to translate, and not to interpret. The fact that the English word ‘teach’ (for veshinantam) misses the additional interpretation of ‘sharpen,’ might therefore be unimportant: Provided the word has been correctly translated, the interpretative meaning is not required.
According to the Raavad, the thrust of reading the translation is interpretation. According to this, the fact that there is no English equivalent for the Hebrew word es will not be relevant: the important factor is that the meaning of the words is faithfully rendered into English. This point might be true according to the Rambam, too: As long as the words are correctly articulated in a foreign tongue, it is possible that the presence or otherwise of the word es is not important.
As we will mention in the summary, some authorities do sanction the use of foreign languages even today.
Foreign Tongues in Different Locations
The Biur Halachah (62:2) cites the ruling of the Ritva (Nedarim, Rif 1a), whereby a neder (vow) made in a foreign tongue only has halachic validity in locations where the tongue is spoken. The Biur Halachah extends the argument to the recitation of Keriyas Shema: It is only permitted to use foreign languages in locales where the respective language is actually spoken.
The rationale behind this halachah is elucidated in the Ran (Nedarim 2a), who explains that a fundamental difference distinguished between Hebrew (lashon ha-kodesh) and foreign languages: Whereas Hebrew is an ‘essential language,’ a language whose words derive from the Divine Torah, other languages are only tongues insofar as nations agree to use them. In places where the languages are not used, the words therefore lack all meaning.
Based on this rationale, there might be room to distinguish between (relatively) new languages, as spoken today in virtually all parts of the world (certainly in the Western world), and ancient languages. As noted in the introduction, the original seventy languages of the world define seventy ‘essential’ ways of thought, all of which have a place in Torah. Indeed, Tosafos (Berachos 13a) mentions that the Torah was given in seventy languages. Ancient tongues, therefore, might be considered as ‘essential languages,’ just as Hebrew.
English, which is derived mainly from Latin, is certainly a new language. As the Chasam Sofer (Chiddushim to Gittin 80a) writes, Latin was only invented several hundred years into the fourth thousand of the world’s existence (academia dates it somewhat earlier)—a long time after the Generation of the Dispersion. English, of course, came into being much later.
English can therefore be used for Keriyas Shema only in places where English is spoken. Yet, it is possible that the general knowledge of English in most Western countries is sufficient to meet this criterion.
An additional halachah in connection with using foreign languages for Keriyas Shema is the question of Hebrew speakers. Rishonim (see Ramban and Rashba, Megillah 17a) cite a ruling from the Yerushalmi (Megillah 2:1) according to which only somebody who does not know ashuris (Hebrew script) can fulfill his obligation in other languages. Somebody who can recite Keriyas Shema in Hebrew does not have the option of using other languages.
However, the opinion of the Rambam (Megillah 2:4), as cited by the rishonim, is that any person, even a Hebrew speaker, can choose which language to use. Both opinions are mentioned by the Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 690:10; the Vilna Gaon explains that this question is the subject of a dispute between the Bavli and the Yerushalmi).
An interesting question arises concerning the reading of Kerias Shema with alternative Hebrew words, which expand the original text: Is a Hebrew interpretation worse than a non-Hebrew translation?
According to the above Yerushalmi, there is little doubt that a recitation of a Hebrew expansion of Keriyas Shema does not qualify to fulfill the mitzvah. Just as one who speaks Hebrew cannot use a foreign tongue, so it stands to reason that somebody who can read the original text cannot use an alternative.
However, even according to the Rambam, it is possible that one will not fulfill the mitzvah with such a reading. As noted above, the Rambam writes that one must articulate the words (of a foreign language) with precision. A deviation from the actual text might render the reading ‘imprecise,’ and therefore disqualify it from fulfilling the mitzvah. Yet, this argument can be deferred, for although deviating from the Torah text, the rendition might still be ‘good Hebrew,’ and this is perhaps sufficient to fulfill the mitzvah.
Reading without Understanding
Commenting on a Mishnah that lists a number of recitations that can be read in any language (and some that must be read specifically in Hebrew), Tosafos (Sotah 32a) question why Hallel, Kiddush of Shabbos, and Berachos, are not listed. Tosafos reply that the Mishnah only lists those recitations that must be understood by the reader. For Hallel, Kiddush, and Berachos, there is no precondition of understanding, and they are therefore not listed by the Mishnah.
It thus emerges from Tosafos that with regard to Keriyas Shema and to prayer (both are listed in the Mishnah) one does not fulfill one’s obligation without understanding the words. This halachah is cited by the Magen Avraham (62:3), and by the Peri Megadim (Eishel Avraham 62:1). With regard to Hallel, Kiddush and Berachos, the Biur Halachah writes that authorities dispute the ruling of Tosafos, and require understanding (for foreign languages) even for these mitzvos.
The Peri Megadim questions whether the principle requiring understanding applies even to somebody reciting the Shema in Hebrew, and does not give a conclusive decision on the matter. However, the Biur Halachah cites from the Levush (193), who writes explicitly that no understanding is required for recitation in Hebrew.
Although the Peri Chadash (end of 101) argues that understanding is always essential, the general consensus of poskim is that for lashon ha-kodesh one fulfills the mitzvah even without understanding. Indeed, according to the Mishnah Berurah (62:3) recitation in Hebrew without understanding is preferable to recitation is other, understood languages (see summary).
Prayer in Other Languages
As noted, prayer, together with Keriyas Shema, is mentioned by the Mishnah in Sotah (32a) as a recitation for which any language is valid. In his opening to the laws of prayer, the Rambam notes that initially, a person would pray to Hashem in words of his own choice. Only in the time of Ezra, when Israel was exiled from its land, and as a result the people were no longer able to express themselves with eloquence, did the Men of the Great Assembly enact the fixed prayer we know.
According to the ruling of the Mishnah, although the wording is now fixed, one can still say the words in any language. The principles detailed above concerning Keriyas Shema, such as the question of a local language, the matter of understanding, and the need to be precise, will also apply to prayer.
The Gemara (Sotah 33a) questions how it is possible that prayer is valid in all languages: Surely Rav Yehudah taught that a person must not beseech in Aramaic, because the ministering angels do not know this language (Rav Yaakov Kamenetzky (Emes Le-Yaakov p. 477) explained that this is because Aramaic is a distortion of lashon ha-kodesh, and the angels do not understand distortions), and will not address his prayer?
The Gemara replies that there is a distinction between an individual and a congregation: A congregation (whose prayers are received directly by Hashem) can pray in any language, even Aramaic; an individual must pray in a language known to the angels. The Rif (Berachos 7a) understands that this principle is not limited to Aramaic, but applies even to every language (other than the original Hebrew).
Rishonim note that this principle raises a difficulty concerning women, who generally pray in the local vernacular, and not in Hebrew, even though they pray alone. Talmidei Rabbeinu Yonah answer, citing from the rabbis of France, that the restriction on foreign languages applies only to somebody praying with his own words; somebody praying the fixed Shemoneh Esrei prayer can do so in any language, even in private. The Rosh (Berachos 2:2), however, suggests that the original Talmudic restriction is limited to Aramaic alone. There is no problem for an individual to pray in languages other than Aramaic.
The Shulchan Aruch (101:4) rules that it is permitted to pray in any language, adding that individuals should pray in Hebrew alone. He continues to mention both the opinion of Rabbeinu Yonah, and the opinion of the Rosh (both as yesh omrim).
The Magen Avraham (5), citing from Sefer Chasidim, rules that it is preferable to pray in a language one understands than to pray in Hebrew (for somebody who does not understand Hebrew). Although the Mishnah Berurah (Biur Halachah) writes that this is true for a sincere yerei shamayim for whom it is important to understand the words, he writes (13) that in general it is best to daven in Hebrew, because the prayer includes many secrets that Chazal hid in the words.
Summary: Kerias Shema and Prayer in Foreign Tongues
We have mentioned a number of halachos pertaining to Keriyas Shema and Prayer in non-Hebrew languages:
- A person can only use a foreign language if he understands it.
- A foreign language can only be used in a place where it is spoken locally.
- According to the Mishnah Berurah, one should generally prefer Hebrew even when one does not understand it, though a foreign language can be used if understanding is important for the individual (for a yerei shamayim). In addition, the Mishnah Berurah writes that nowadays, the entire practice of using foreign languages is questionable.
- It is noteworthy that Rav Moshe Feinstein (Iggros Moshe, Orach Chaim 4:70, sec. 4) instructed somebody to daven the Shemoneh Esrei prayer in English, stipulating that the translation should be done by benei torah. His main objection in the teshuvah is to the idea of somebody davening in his own words; Rav Moshe explains that this is wrong, and one should always fulfill the obligation of prayer with the words of Chazal, even in foreign languages.
- The general custom is that wherever possible a person should pray in Hebrew. A translation can be used to check the meaning of the words.
It is noteworthy that in previous generations, and in particular when the haskalah movement gained momentum, many of the leading halachic authorities expressed strong objections to prayer in foreign languages. The Chasam Sofer (Vol. 6, no. 94) thus rules that it is forbidden to pray in other languages on a regular basis, and Sefer Eleh Divrei Ha-Bris cites the harsh words of several luminaries in objecting to those who change the prayer service from Hebrew to other languages.
This is also the background for the strong words of the Mishnah Berurah (101:13), and the Aruch Hashulchan (62:5; see also siman 101 and 185) likewise rules unequivocally that one should not pray or recite Keriyas Shema in any language but lashon ha-kodesh, being particularly stringent concerning somebody who knows Hebrew.
By contrast with the negative winds of change that blew during the nineteenth and early twentieth century, today there is a broad teshuvah movement, bringing about a condition whereby many people who wish to be Torah observant, do not know Hebrew.
For such people, who wish to daven but find it hard or even impossible to do so in Hebrew, it is important to know the principles of reciting Keriyas Shema or prayer in other languages.