Text of Brachot: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Why Chazal Formulated the Text of Brachot as They Did?
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
==Why Chazal Formulated the Text of Brachot as They Did?== | ==Why Chazal Formulated the Text of Brachot as They Did?== | ||
#All brachot are required to begin with Baruch Atta Hashem Melech Haolam unless they are adjoined to another bracha. This is called ''bracha hasemucha lchaverta'', which is discussed on the [[Bracha Hasemucha Lchaverta]] page. | #All brachot are required to begin with Baruch Atta Hashem Melech Haolam unless they are adjoined to another bracha. This is called ''bracha hasemucha lchaverta'', which is discussed on the [[Bracha Hasemucha Lchaverta]] page. | ||
# Most [[birchot hamitzvah]] begin with the text of "al" or "le" which is written with the letter lamed. The rishonim debate the reason for each bracha. The primary motivation that the Gemara Pesachim 7a outlines as to why brachot have a certain text is in order to indicate that it is going to be fulfilled in the future. Lamed certainly has the implication of the future, whereas "al" is a dispute. Nonetheless, the conclusion is that "al" also refers to the future. Therefore, both are acceptable but for certain cases one is more appropriate than the other. The two main approaches in the rishonim as to explaining most brachot are espoused by Rabbenu Tam and the Riva. Rabbenu Tam<ref>Ramban Pesachim 7a s.v. vlashon quoting the Raavad in name of Rav Moshe Ben Rabbi Yosef espouses an approach just like that of Rabbenu Tam. Any mitzvah which is done consistently and isn't fulfilled at one point in time has a bracha that starts with lamed such as tefillin and tzitzit. However, lulav, milah, shechita, and bedikat chametz are mitzvot that only need to be fulfilled one time and that is sufficient.</ref> thinks that any mitzvah which is fulfilled at one time, isn't ongoing, and doesn't involve a duration with pauses should have the text of "al". If it is a mitzvah that endures for some time with a pause or is an ongoing mitzvah it should begin with a lamed.<ref>The Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar ch. 340 presents his approach as though it all depends on whether the mitzvah can be fulfilled at one time and be completed or it involved an ongoing obligation or endures for a period of time. This is also the presentation of the Rabbenu Peretz Pesachim 7b and Ramban Pesachim 7a of the Rabbenu Tam. The Rosh Pesachim 1:10 has a slightly different version of Rabbenu Tam. He reformulates the rule to state that mitzvot which include necessary pauses have a bracha that begins with "al", while mitzvot which don't have any pauses, even if they take time, starts with "al". This explanation answer's the Rabbenu Peretz's question on Rabbenu Tam with respect to Megillah. The Rabbenu Peretz wondered what was the difference between Hallel and Megillah for the Rabbenu Tam, both seem to endure for some time and yet Megillah starts with "al". Rosh Pesachim 1:10 answers that although the Megillah takes time it doesn't involve any breaks from the beginning to the end of the mitzvah a person is actively involved in performing it. Whereas Hallel necessitates breaks for the chazan to wait for the congregation to respond to his readings and the congregation must wait for the chazan to read each pasuk. This coral chants back and forth are described in Sukkah 38a and Sotah 30b.</ref> Riva, on the other hand, thinks that the main consideration is whether a person can fulfill it through an agent or he must do so by himself. If he must do it by himself, the most appropriate text is "al", but if he must do it himself the text should begin with a lamed.<ref>Rosh Pesachim 1:10, Rabbenu Peretz Pesachim 7b</ref> A slightly different version of this approach is found in the Ramban.<ref>A slightly different version of this approach is found in the Ramban Pesachim 7a. Originally the Ramban starts with this exact approach that it all depends on whether a person must do it himself or it can be fulfilled with an agent. Accordingly, removing trumot and maaserot should have be with "al" since that can be fulfilled with an agent. At the end of his piece he says that later after his original writing, he found a Tosefta and Yerushalmi that indeed proved that the bracha for removing trumot and maaserot was with a lamed. Therefore, he amended his approach. Any mitzvah which needs to be done by oneself or can be done with an agent that is either appointed by oneself or at least has a person's permission would warrant a bracha with a lamed. That includes Tefillin, Tzitzit, Matzah, Maror, and Hallel as well as removing Trumot and Maaserot. However, a mitzvah which could be fulfilled by others even without appointing them specifically warrants a bracha with "al". These include Bedikat Chametz, Milah, and Shechita. A seeming exception is Megillah that can be done by oneself or through agency of the chazan and yet it has a bracha with "al". The Rabbenu Dovid answers that Megillah is a mitzvah upon each person to listen to a formal ''kriyah'' - reading from a kosher handwritten Megillah. That aspect of the mitzvah is fulfilled by someone else. This type of approach with nuances can be found in the Ritva Pesachim 7b, Ri Mnarvona Pesachim 7b, Meiri Pesachim 7b s.v. elah, and Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 7b s.v. vachshavv. Meiri 7b s.v. vchachmei is very stuck on the Megillah for the Ramban.</ref> Rambam also subscribes to this approach; yet he holds that the bracha depends on whether a person is doing the mitzvah for himself or someone else is doing the mitzvah for another.<ref>Rambam Brachot 11:11-13 explains that any bracha that a person does for himself begins with a lamed, such as Tefillin, Tzitzit, Sukkah, Shabbat candles, Hallel, Mezuzah, making a fence on one's roof, removing Trumot and Maaserot, and Milah. However, if he is doing the mitzvah for someone else then he starts the bracha with "al". For example, | # Most [[birchot hamitzvah]] begin with the text of "al" or "le" which is written with the letter lamed. The rishonim debate the reason for each bracha. The primary motivation that the Gemara Pesachim 7a outlines as to why brachot have a certain text is in order to indicate that it is going to be fulfilled in the future. Lamed certainly has the implication of the future, whereas "al" is a dispute. Nonetheless, the conclusion is that "al" also refers to the future. Therefore, both are acceptable but for certain cases one is more appropriate than the other. The two main approaches in the rishonim as to explaining most brachot are espoused by Rabbenu Tam and the Riva. Rabbenu Tam<ref>Ramban Pesachim 7a s.v. vlashon quoting the Raavad in name of Rav Moshe Ben Rabbi Yosef espouses an approach just like that of Rabbenu Tam. Any mitzvah which is done consistently and isn't fulfilled at one point in time has a bracha that starts with lamed such as tefillin and tzitzit. However, lulav, milah, shechita, and bedikat chametz are mitzvot that only need to be fulfilled one time and that is sufficient.</ref> thinks that any mitzvah which is fulfilled at one time, isn't ongoing, and doesn't involve a duration with pauses should have the text of "al". If it is a mitzvah that endures for some time with a pause or is an ongoing mitzvah it should begin with a lamed.<ref>The Rabbenu Tam in Sefer Hayashar ch. 340 presents his approach as though it all depends on whether the mitzvah can be fulfilled at one time and be completed or it involved an ongoing obligation or endures for a period of time. This is also the presentation of the Rabbenu Peretz Pesachim 7b and Ramban Pesachim 7a of the Rabbenu Tam. The Rosh Pesachim 1:10 has a slightly different version of Rabbenu Tam. He reformulates the rule to state that mitzvot which include necessary pauses have a bracha that begins with "al", while mitzvot which don't have any pauses, even if they take time, starts with "al". This explanation answer's the Rabbenu Peretz's question on Rabbenu Tam with respect to Megillah. The Rabbenu Peretz wondered what was the difference between Hallel and Megillah for the Rabbenu Tam, both seem to endure for some time and yet Megillah starts with "al". Rosh Pesachim 1:10 answers that although the Megillah takes time it doesn't involve any breaks from the beginning to the end of the mitzvah a person is actively involved in performing it. Whereas Hallel necessitates breaks for the chazan to wait for the congregation to respond to his readings and the congregation must wait for the chazan to read each pasuk. This coral chants back and forth are described in Sukkah 38a and Sotah 30b.</ref> Riva, on the other hand, thinks that the main consideration is whether a person can fulfill it through an agent or he must do so by himself. If he must do it by himself, the most appropriate text is "al", but if he must do it himself the text should begin with a lamed.<ref>Rosh Pesachim 1:10, Rabbenu Peretz Pesachim 7b</ref> A slightly different version of this approach is found in the Ramban.<ref>A slightly different version of this approach is found in the Ramban Pesachim 7a. Originally the Ramban starts with this exact approach that it all depends on whether a person must do it himself or it can be fulfilled with an agent. Accordingly, removing trumot and maaserot should have be with "al" since that can be fulfilled with an agent. At the end of his piece he says that later after his original writing, he found a Tosefta and Yerushalmi that indeed proved that the bracha for removing trumot and maaserot was with a lamed. Therefore, he amended his approach. Any mitzvah which needs to be done by oneself or can be done with an agent that is either appointed by oneself or at least has a person's permission would warrant a bracha with a lamed. That includes Tefillin, Tzitzit, Matzah, Maror, and Hallel as well as removing Trumot and Maaserot. However, a mitzvah which could be fulfilled by others even without appointing them specifically warrants a bracha with "al". These include Bedikat Chametz, Milah, and Shechita. A seeming exception is Megillah that can be done by oneself or through agency of the chazan and yet it has a bracha with "al". The Rabbenu Dovid answers that Megillah is a mitzvah upon each person to listen to a formal ''kriyah'' - reading from a kosher handwritten Megillah. That aspect of the mitzvah is fulfilled by someone else. This type of approach with nuances can be found in the Ritva Pesachim 7b, Ri Mnarvona Pesachim 7b, Meiri Pesachim 7b s.v. elah, and Rabbenu Dovid Pesachim 7b s.v. vachshavv. Meiri 7b s.v. vchachmei is very stuck on the Megillah for the Ramban.</ref> Rambam also subscribes to this approach; yet he holds that the bracha depends on whether a person is doing the mitzvah for himself or someone else is doing the mitzvah for another.<ref>Rambam Brachot 11:11-13 explains that any bracha that a person does for himself begins with a lamed, such as Tefillin, Tzitzit, Sukkah, Shabbat candles, Hallel, Mezuzah, making a fence on one's roof, removing Trumot and Maaserot, and Milah. However, if he is doing the mitzvah for someone else then he starts the bracha with "al". For example, if a person put up a mezuzah for others, put up a mezuzah for others, made a fence on another's roof, removed trumah for others, or did milah for another's child should recite a bracha with "al". Rambam Brachot 11:11-15 sets several principles: 1) If the mitzvah already has been partially fulfilled the bracha starts with “al”. 2) If it is a mitzvah done by oneself for oneself the bracha starts with a lamed. If someone is doing a mitzvah for someone else the bracha starts with “al”. 3) If the mitzvah isn’t obligatory the bracha starts with “al”. Lulav and Bedikat Chametz are included in the first rule. Rule two explains Tefillin, Tzitzit, Sukkah, Shabbat candles, Hallel, Mezuzah, Building a Fence, Removing Trumot and Maaserot, Milah, Shechita of a korban pesach. Setting up an Eruv, Shechita, and Netilat Yadayim are included in the third rule. The Raavad notes how the Rambam’s rules do not explain the bracha for Megillah, Matza, and Maror. Hagahot Maimoniyot 11:6 echoes this challenge. The Migdal Oz answers that the Rambam held that the bracha upon Megillah is “al” since ideally the mitzvah was established to be said in public with at least a minyan. Also, Matzah and Maror which originally were eaten together with a korban pesach are established with “al” since the korban pesach is generally done with a group. To highlight this aspect of the mitzvah the rabbis established with “al” which is the appropriate bracha for fulfilling someone else’s obligation. The Kesef Mishna rejects the Migdal Oz’s answers and leaves the Raavad’s question unanswered. He answers why Birchot Hatorah starts with “al” according to the Rambam. He says that since the obligation to learn Torah is continual it starts with “al” similar to a mitzvah that was partially fulfilled. Or Same’ach endorses the Migdal Oz and adds another reason for the korban pesach since when one eats it the mitzvah of sacrificing it is already partially fulfilled.</ref> | ||
#[[Erusin]]: The text is She'asar Lanu Et Harusot and doesn't begin with lamed or al but is a discussion if it is recited before or after the performance of the mitzvah. See [[Kiddushin]] page. | #[[Erusin]]: The text is She'asar Lanu Et Harusot and doesn't begin with lamed or al but is a discussion if it is recited before or after the performance of the mitzvah. See [[Kiddushin]] page. | ||
# [[Bedikat Chametz]]: Al Biur Chametz. Some explain that the text of the bracha begins with "al" because it can be fulfilled by an agent.<ref>Rabbenu Peretz 7b s.v. lechen citing Riva, Ri Mnarvona Pesachim 7a s.v. vani</ref> Some explain that the text of the bracha begins with "al" because it is a quick mitzvah that doesn't endure for a long time.<ref>Rabbenu Peretz 7b s.v. lechen citing Rabbenu Tam</ref> | # [[Bedikat Chametz]]: Al Biur Chametz. Some explain that the text of the bracha begins with "al" because it can be fulfilled by an agent.<ref>Rabbenu Peretz 7b s.v. lechen citing Riva, Ri Mnarvona Pesachim 7a s.v. vani</ref> Some explain that the text of the bracha begins with "al" because it is a quick mitzvah that doesn't endure for a long time.<ref>Rabbenu Peretz 7b s.v. lechen citing Rabbenu Tam</ref> | ||
