243 —הגיית לרצות ונוסח אבינו מלכנו בימי תענית ציבור

B"H, Thursday, 4 Menachem Av, 5706.

Shalom u'Vrachah!

In response to your letter from last week: a) Regarding the vocalization of the word 'Leratzot' (as in 'Rach Leratzot' in the request of Aneinu and 'the one who holds by hand'), there are differences in printed siddurim and machzorim, and it is impossible to determine who made the changes—the young typesetter or whoever the siddur is named after. For example, in Siddur Shaar HaShamayim by the Shelah, Amsterdam edition 1717—in Pirkei Avot 5:11—'Leratzot' has an open resh; in the Warsaw edition 1882, resh has a kamatz and lamed has a tzeirei. But I found that the Yaavetz in his commentary Lechem Nekudim on Avot wrote: 'Leratzot,' lamed with a chirik, resh with a shva, and mem with a patach from heaviness—this is mistaken. Similarly, in Siddur Avodat Yisrael, which was edited based on several manuscripts and siddurim, he wrote that this is how it appears in the oldest manuscript he found (on parchment from year 5406), and this is primary. Also, in the siddur printed in Rostov (in Pirkei Avot), it is as above, and it is said that it was edited according to the instructions of my revered father-in-law (but in Siddur Torah Or and Warsaw edition 1867—in Pirkei Avot—the vocalization is: lamed with tzeirei, resh with kamatz). In Siddur Rostov at the beginning of Tefillat Tal, lamed has a sheva and resh is open (and so wrote Rabbi Rachamim Naeh in his pamphlet on siddurim according to his own opinion), because there it is an active verb upon the land as is evident—and while discussing this I should note that they changed the prayer to say 'Rach Leratzot,' even though the language of the Mishnah is 'Noach Leratzot,' and perhaps they wanted to arrange it according to alphabetical order—which is somewhat forced.

b) Regarding the wording of Avinu Malkeinu during a public fast day: until I received your letter I had no doubt that one should say: 'Zachreinu leChaim Tovim,' etc., omitting the word 'b'Sefer,' as we say 'Zachreinu leChaim...' and 'Ketavenu b'Sefer HaChaim...,' so what connection does remembrance have with 'and [in] the book'? (It also requires further investigation at first glance if there is writing into these books throughout the year except for Aseret Yemei Teshuvah.) I searched now in siddurim and found in Siddur Beit Yaakov (Lemberg 1904) under Yaavetz's version: 'Zachreinu leChaim,' omitting 'b'Sefer.' The same appears in Siddur Otzar HaTefillot which is relatively precise; also in Siddur Shelah (Amsterdam 1717) and Beit El which Yaavetz himself printed—there is no separate Avinu Malkeinu for public fasts. But in Siddur Shaar HaShamayim (Warsaw 1882) I found: 'Zachreinu b'Sefer Chaim Tovim...' This seems somewhat like Rabbi Chaim Auerbach's opinion as printed by Yechielowski. And see this new thing I found in Siddur Tefillah LeMoshe: after Shacharit prayer he writes: some are accustomed to say on a public fast day Avinu Malkeinu and must be careful to skip new Avinu Malkeinus etc., and for those five new ones where it says 'Ketavenu...' In Beit Yaakov above he brings two opinions: to skip new Avinu Malkeinus Ketavenu; others say to say Zachreinu; but he does not mention about new Avinu Malkeinus at all nor whether to say 'b'Sefer.' In Beit El none of this appears.

With blessings for immediate teshuvah—immediate redemption,
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson
From a copy by secretariat.

Summary

The Rebbe clarifies proper pronunciation practices for certain prayers based on authoritative sources and addresses variations regarding wording during public fast days. He emphasizes careful adherence to tradition while acknowledging differences among printed siddurim.