I was asking about one who davened with a bare head. How should one act, practically speaking, in terms of repeating or not repeating SE and the other parts of davening? I know that it is a machlokes between Rav Moshe, who strongly implies that he has to repeat SE, versus other poskim who don’t require him to repeat, but I don’t know how one should act in practice if this issue should arise.

The logical eitza is to repeat as a nedava, but there are 2 problems: we don’t say voluntary prayers nowadays, and on Shabbos and Yom Tov it is forbidden to utter such prayers.


You should say SE again.


See Eishei Yisroel 10-8 ftnt. 33. Where he paskens like R’ Moshe Igros Moshe O:C  4-40 ( 14), and he also brings R’ S. Z., but he still paskens like R’ Moshe. (BTW the Eishei Yisroel was written by a student of R ’S. Z. and as reviewed by R’ Y. Y. Neuwirth Zt”l, a talmid of R’ S. Z.)

As a side point, it could be that there is no disagreement between them. R’ Moshe clearly states that his psak is because “in our countries”, it is the norm for the goyim to pray specifically with an uncovered head, out of respect. Therefore, says R’ Moshe it is a toeivah to daven that way in our countries. R’ S. Z brings a midrash that an uncovered head is not meakev the davening. That might have been fine during the time of the midrash, however R’ Moshe was writing something else. The same thing applies regarding what the Ohr Letzion 2-7(13).

Tags: Kippah tefila

Share The Knowledge

Not what you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged Prayer (tefilla) Kippah tefila or ask your own question.

2 Responses to “Davened bareheaded”

  1. But safek brachos l’hakel?

    And there could be a difference b/w one who did it on purpose versus one who did it by accident – if he did it by accident, such as his yarmulke fell off in the course of putting on tefillin, for example, it is hard to say that it is an abomination b/c it’s not like he deliberately removed his yarmulke in order to daven!

    • That is what I was saying, that it could be that there is no machlokes therefore it isn’t a sefek.
      See R’ Moshe’s teshuva there where he says that if it was on purpose then surely he has to daven again, and even if it was by accident. If it was an o’nes then R’ Moshe isn’t sure.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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