2019/5780

Rav Ovadia Yoseif’s Limitations on Lo Titgodedu

Chacham Ovadia, in the aforementioned responsum, notes some dramatic limitations on the prohibition of Lo Titgodedu. He argues (based on Radbaz Leshonot HaRambam 11) that Lo Titgodedu does not apply to well-known disagreements such as those that rage between Beit Hillel and Beit Shamai. Rav Ovadia applies this distinction to the disagreements between Sephardic and Ashkenazic Jews. Thus, he permits Sephardic Yeshivah students to shave and cut their hair between the seventeenth of Tammuz and the week during which Tisha Be’Av falls, even though Ashkenazim regard this as forbidden.

Rav Ovadia argues that this difference in practice should not lead to great discord since it is well-known that Sephardic Jews follow the Shulchan Aruch regarding this issue and Ashkenazim follow the Rama (Orah Chaim 551:3). The assertion that divergent Ashkenazic and Sephardic customs do not violate Lo Titgodedu is a recurring theme in Rav Ovadia’s writings (see, for example, Teshuvot Yabi’a Omer 4 Even HaEzer 13, 5 Orach Chaim 37:4 and Yoreh Dei’ah 3 and 6 Orach Chaim 10).

Rav Ovadia follows Rav Mordechai Benet (Teshuvot Parashat Mordechai, Orach Chaim 4), who rules with in regard to divergent practices that stem from ancient disputes, Lo Titgodedu does not apply even when both practices are observed simultaneously in the same Beit Kenesset.

Rav Ovadia applied this approach in practice to his own personal comportment. Rav Shmuel Khoshkerman vividly recalls Rav Ovadia Yoseif’s visit to Baltimore’s Yeshivas Ner Yisroel in the 1980’s. Rav Khoshkerman was among a large group of young Jews who had escaped from Iran and were separated from their parents. Ner Yisroel took in many of these students.14 When Rav Ovadia was given the honor of Aliyat Shelishi, he recited the Berachot in complete accordance with Sephardic pronunciation and text.15 In conformity with Sephardic practice, he even recited Kaddish after his Aliyah.

Moreover, Rav Khoshkerman reports that the great Rosh Yeshiva of Ner Yisroel, Rav Yaakov Yitzhak Ruderman, instructed the Sephardic students to follow all Sephardic customs while they prayed together with the Yeshiva (Ashkenaz) Minyan.

Rav Moshe Feinstein vs. Rav Ovadia Yosef

When I reported Rav Ruderman’s ruling to Rav Hershel Schachter he reacted with surprise. He argued that Rav Ruderman should have instructed the Sephardic Talmidim to make a separate Minyan. He noted that this is what was done when Moroccan students began attending the Mirrer Yeshiva in the 2000’s.

Rav Schachter16 follows the approach of Rav Moshe Feinstein (Teshuvot Igrot Moshe Orach Chaim 2:23) who rules that when praying in a synagogue whose Nusach differs from one’s own, one should pray in conformity with the Tzibur’s Nusach in regards to the portions of Tefillah that are normally said out loud.

Although Rav Moshe prohibits even praying Pesukei DeZimrah in accordance with one’s own Nusach, since it may be said out loud, Rav Schachter permits it. He argues that since it is common in Modern Orthodox synagogues to recite Pesukei DeZimrah quietly it is permissible to quietly recite this portion of Tefillah quietly in accordance with one’s own Nusach.

Thus, Rav Schachter rules that an Ashkenazic Jew who prays in a Sephardic Beit Kenesset should use an Ashkenazic Siddur and pray in accordance with Ashkenazic practice, except for the portions of Tefillah such as Kedushah or Kadish that are said out loud.

Rav Schachter did permit, though, an Ashkenazic Jew visiting a Sephardic synagogue to use a Sephardic Siddur and to pray in complete conformity with Sephardic Tefillah if he would otherwise find it confusing. I advise most17 Ashkenazic Jews to follow this in practice because experience indicates that using an Ashkenazic Siddur in a Sephardic synagogue leads to considerable confusion.

Rav Ovadia Yosef (Teshuvot YeChavei Da’at 3:6), on the other hand, adopts a dramatically more narrow definition of Lo Titgodedu. He urges Sephardic Jews praying in an Ashkenazic congregation to completely adhere to Sephardic practice.18 He even goes as far as saying that a Sephardic mourner should recite Kaddish in conformity with Sephardic text even when praying in an Ashkenazic Kehillah!

Rav Ovadia Yosef’s Exceptions

Even Rav Ovadia, however, sets limits about deviating from the practices of one’s host synagogue. Rav Ovadia rules (Teshuvot Yechaveh Da’at 3:4) that a Sephardic Jew should stand for Kaddish when praying with Ashkenazim.19 He also rules that a Kehillah should adopt a uniform manner of performing the Na’anu’im on Sukkot (Hazon Ovadia Sukkot 353). Finally, he also urges one to wear Tefillin on Tishah Be’Av in the afternoon when visiting a congregation where this is the prevailing Minhag (Hazon Ovadia, Daled Ta’ani’ot page 370 in the Bi’urim).

It is difficult to discern a pattern or principle that guides Rav Ovadia as to when to permit or forbid deviation from a congregation’s prevailing Minhag. It seems, though, that even Rav Ovadia frowns upon divergent practices when it irritates congregants. In other words, Rav Ovadia permits different practices when there is a perceived permission and consent. In a situation where such consent is lacking and there is concern for strife and conflict, the concern for Lo Titgodedu emerges.

This distinction is similar to that which Rav Shternbuch articulates that Lo Titgodedu does not apply when there is consent to divergent practice. Absent such consent, Lo Titgodedu applies.

Divergent Sephardic Practices in a Sephardic Beit Kenesset

Rav Shmuel Koshkerman has repeatedly told me that Rav Ovadia’s ruling applies to different Sephardic practices in a pan-Sephardic synagogue such as Shaarei Orah in Teaneck and Ner Mizrach in Atlanta (where Rav Khoshkerman serves as the Rav). Rav Baruch Gigi told me that this is standard practice in pan-Sephardic congregations in Israel.

Accordingly, in a pan-Sephardic synagogue it is acceptable to have some following the Minhag Yerushalayim to stand for the Kaddish prior to Barechu on Friday evening and others to follow the Moroccan custom to sit. Similarly, at Minchah on a Ta’anit Tzibur it is acceptable for men to wear Tefillin and others to refrain from doing so (as indicated in Rav David Yosef’s Halachah Berurah 37 and 38:20).

This, however, would not seem to apply to a homogenous Sephardic synagogue such as a synagogue that practices a specific rite such as a synagogue designated as a Moroccan, Syrian, Turkish or Persian Beit Kenesset. Once again, we distinguish between a homogeneous and heterogeneous community. In a heterogeneous community -as we quoted earlier form Rav Shternbuch - there is consent for divergence in practice. There is, however, room to draw limits on certain issues, especially those for which there is a consensus among the various Sephardic communities.20

Conclusion

Interestingly, I asked Rav Shlomo Amar when he visited Congregation Shaarei Orah in August 2017 whether it is acceptable to maintain one uniform practice in a Sephardic Beit Kenesset or may divergent practices be countenanced. He replied that it is preferable to maintain one Minhag but if the synagogue rabbi feels it is in the best interest of the congregation to tolerate divergent Sephardic practices, he may do so. Therefore, we see that a synagogue may choose to define itself as homogeneous or heterogeneous.

Thus, we may conclude the question we posed at the beginning of this essay as to whether the Halachah requires everyone praying in one synagogue to follow the same practices. The answer is that it depends on the character of the synagogue and the particular issue at hand. Sometimes the Lo Titgodedu principle demands conformity while at other times divergence is acceptable.

13 Even Yirat Elokim, fear of God, is frequently used in the Torah as a referendum on one’s treatment of his fellow human beings; for example, Avraham believes that he is in mortal danger in Gerar because, “Rak Ein Yirat Elokim BaMakom HaZeh,” “There is no fear of God in this place” (BeReishit 20:11).

14 Quite a number of these young Persian Jews who learned for many years at Ner Yisroel later emerged as significant rabbinic leaders in the Sephardic community and beyond.

15 Indeed, Chacham Yitzhak Yosef rules (his decision is printed in Rav Yonatan Nacson’s MiMizrach UmiMa’arav page 273) that this is the proper practice for a Sephardic Jew who receives an Aliyah in an Ashkenazic Beit Kenesset.

16 Rav Mordechai Willig told me he also subscribes to Rav Moshe’s approach.

17 An exception would be one who is proficient in both Ashkenazic and Sephardic Noscha’ot.

18 Rav Shalom Messas (Teshuvot Shemesh UMagein 3: Orach Chaim 24) concurs. Rav Shlomo Amar (Teshuvot Shema Shlomo 2:7) writes that this emerged as the accepted practice among Sephardic Jews when visiting an Ashkenazic synagogue.

19 In this regard we have the specific directive of the Massechet Derech Eretz Rabbah Perek 7 to not be standing among those who are seated, nor to be seated among those who are standing.

20 The universally accepted Sephardic practice to refrain from wearing Tefillin on Hol HaMoed may be one such example.