Attention to the Meaning of Blessings
HALAKHA: A WEEKLY SHIUR IN HALAKHIC TOPICS
Attention to the
meaning of Blessings
Rav Elyakim Krumbein*
I. THE
BA'AL HA-TANYA'S NOVEL POSITION
The Shulchan Arukh writes (OC 193): "If two people ate
and
one knows [how to recite the grace after meals] and the other does not, the one
who knows should recite grace, and the other fulfills his obligation, provided
that he understands Hebrew, only that he does not know how to recite grace
. But
if he does not understand [Hebrew], he does not fulfill his obligation through
hearing.
The Mishna Berura (ad loc.) writes in the name of the Magen
Avraham that there are those who disagree and say that if a person hears
grace being recited in Hebrew, he fulfills his obligation even if he does not
understand, and that indeed women are accustomed to fulfill their obligation
through hearing grace being recited by others, even though they do not
understand what is being said. The Mishna Berura concludes, however, that
it is preferable that the person repeat the grace word for word after the one
reciting it, "for in such manner he fulfills his obligation according to all
authorities." The source of this disagreement is a dispute between Rashi and the
Tosafot cited by the Rosh (Berakhot 7:6).
The Ba'al ha-Tanya (Shulchan Arukh ha-Rav 185) disagrees
with the Magen Avraham and the Mishna Berura and says that
according to the more stringent position, it does not help to repeat the grace
word for word after the one reciting it, because a person cannot fulfill his
obligation to recite grace in a language that he does not understand, not only
if he hears grace being recited by others, but even if he recites it himself.
The Ba'al ha-Tanya explains:
For I cannot apply to this: "And you shall bless the
Lord your God," because he does not understand the words of the blessing that he
utters with his mouth. [This is true] even if he knows whom he is blessing, and
it is his intention to bless God with these words, and all the more so [does he
not fulfill his obligation] if his heart was directed at something else while he
was reciting the blessings, even if he understands Hebrew.
The Ba'al ha-Tanya argues that grace after meals is not a mitzva
that involves mere recitation, but rather it belongs to that class of
mitzvot that have two components "a duty of the limbs" and "a duty of the
heart." Thus it is similar to the mitzvot of keri'at shema and
prayer, which require more than mere recitation; indispensible for their
fulfillment is some internal experience acceptance of the yoke of heaven or
heartfelt beseeching of mercy, respectively. Similarly, the fulfillment of the
mitzva of grace requires both verbal recitation and attention to the
meaning. This stands in contrast to most other mitzvot, which even if
their purpose is to nurture and develop a certain experience, this element is
not indispensible for their fulfillment. For example, even though the Torah
explicitly states that the purpose of the mitzva of sitting in the
sukka is "that your generations may know that I made the children of Israel
dwell in booths" (Vayikra 23:43), even one who is unaware of the meaning
of the mitzva fulfills his obligation by dwelling in the sukka.
II. THE CONNECTION BETWEE MEGILLA AND BIRKAT
HA-MAZON
The Magen Avraham and the Shulchan Arukh ha-Rav apparently
disagree about how to understand a certain passage in tractate Megilla, a
passage which is the focus of the disagreement between Rashi and the Tosafot
noted above, whether women who do not understand fulfill their obligation
through hearing.
The Mishna (Megilla 17a) states:
If one who does not understand Hebrew hears it [the
megilla] read in Hebrew, he has fulfilled his obligation.
The Gemara raises a question (18a):
But he does not know what they are saying? [The Gemara
answers:] He is on the same footing as women and ignorant people. Ravina
strongly objected: And do we know the meaning of "ha-achashteranim benei
ha-ramakhim"? But all the same we perform the mitzva of reading the
megilla and proclaiming the miracle.
Rashi there explains: "And proclaiming the miracle even though people do
not understand what they hear, they ask and they are told what this reading is
and how the miracle took place, and they are informed."
Rashi proves that women fulfill their obligation when they hear grace
being recited by another person from this law that even one who does not
understand
Hebrew fulfills his obligation when he hears the megilla read in Hebrew.
The Tosafot reject this proof, arguing that the Gemara itself does not accept
this principle and asks: "But he does not know what
they are saying," and it is only because fulfillment of the mitzva of
megilla depends on "proclaiming the miracle" that it suffices to hear the
megilla even if one does not understand what he heard and this does not
apply in the case of grace after meals.
The viewpoint of the Tosafot that women must understand what they are
hearing depends on how we understand the Gemara's objection:
"But he does not know what they are saying." The Magen
Avraham maintains that understanding what is being said is a condition for
applying the principle "shome'a ke-oneh," i.e., that hearing is effective
just like reciting. In order to fulfill one's obligation through hearing as a
substitute for recitation, we require a higher level of "hearing," which
includes understanding. The Ba'al ha-Tanya, on the other hand, thinks
that this interpretation is difficult, for even "proclaiming the miracle" can be
achieved without understanding. In the end the principle of "shome'a ke-oneh"
must be invoked in order to fulfill the mitzva, and according to the
Magen Avraham this is conditional on understanding the language. Thus, it is
difficult to understand the Gemara's answer according to the Magen Avraham.
According to the Ba'al ha-Tanya, the Gemara's objection itself
relates to the mitzva of "proclaiming the miracle." That is to say, since the
mitzva of megilla involves not only reading the text, but also
the personal experience of "proclaiming the miracle," it follows that the one
who hears the megilla being read, as well as the one who actually reads
it, must understand the meaning of the words. To this the Gemara answers that in
the case of "proclaiming the miracle," we can waive the requirement of
understanding the text that is read, because even one who does not understand it
will eventually become aware of its general content, and this is enough. But
argue the Tosafot this answer is only valid in the context of the mitzva
of megilla. As far as other mitzvot are concerned, the
assumption that underlies the Gemara's objection -
"But he does not
know what they are saying" remains in place. The assumption is that regarding
a mitzva of recitation that requires "a fulfillment in the heart" the
experiential fulfillment must stem from an understanding of the text that must
be recited, and that a general comprehension without a precise literal
understanding does not suffice. The Tosafot apparently assume that the mitzva
of grace after meals requires "a fulfillment in the heart," and therefore it
is clear to them that this mitzva cannot be fulfilled in a language that
is not understood, based on the Gemara in Megilla.
It may be asked: What is the Tosafot's source that the
mitzva of grace requires "a fulfillment in the heart"? While it stands to reason that it is
preferable to recite the grace while paying attention to the meaning of the
words, it does not necessarily follow that the absence of such attention should
invalidate the recitation.
"GRACE AFTER MEALS MAY BE RECITED IN ANY LANGUAGE
There is a hint in the wording of the Shulchan Arukh ha-Rav that
this principle is derived from the Gemara in Sota. The Mishna there (32a)
spells out those texts which "may be recited in any language" as opposed to
those which "must be recited in Hebrew." The Gemara there investigates the
sources for all these cases. Regarding the allowance to recite the grace after
meals in any language, the Gemara notes: "Because it is written: 'And you shall
eat and be sated, and you shall bless the Lord your God' [we derive that it is
valid] in any language that you recite the blessing." Rashi (ad loc.)
understands that there is no real source for this law. Rather, what the Gemara
means is that there is no hint in the Torah that the grace must be recited
specifically in Hebrew, and so it may be inferred that it may be recited in any
language (accordingly, Rashis version of the text lacks the term: "From where
do we derive this?").
The Tosafot (ad loc.) disagree. They understand that an explicit source
is needed to allow grace to be recited in any language (see there the reason for
this). The derivation is as follows:
"And you shall bless the Lord,"
that is to say, since the blessing, and the praise, is directed toward God, you
can recite the blessing in any language that you wish, and presumably, in a
language that you know, so that you may wholeheartedly offer praise for your
benefit. And so too we find in the Yerushalmi: "'And you shall bless'
so that he should know to whom he recites the blessing."
That is to say, the derivation does not relate directly to the language
in which the blessing must be recited, but rather to the definition of the
obligation, and it is from this definition that we may draw a conclusion about
the language. The blessing is "directed toward God" and must be recited
"wholeheartedly," and therefore it need not be recited in Hebrew. On the one
hand, this means that one may recite the grace in any language, but on the other
hand, this leads to a certain stringency. Namely, the grace can only be recited
in a known and understood language, for otherwise the blessing cannot be recited
"wholeheartedly." Thus, the Ba'al ha-Tanya's assumption is almost
explicitly stated in Tosafot in Berakhot, namely that the grace after
meals requires "a fulfillment in the heart," and that this is derived from the
verse, "And you shall bless the Lord." Only that according to Rashi in Sota
there is no proof, and it stands to reason that Rashi is consistent with his
own position that in fact one may recite grace even in a language that he does
not understand.
ATTENTION TO THE MEANING WITH RESPECT TO OTHER BLESSINGS
Does the Tosafot's stringency also apply to other blessings? Logically it
would seem that if this is required for grace after meals, a blessing required
by the Torah, the Sages would have followed this fundamental definition with
respect to blessings that they instituted as well, insisting that one meet the
criterion of, "And you shall bless the Lord your God." Accordingly, attention to
the meaning should be indispensible with respect to all blessings. This is the
understanding of the Shulchan Arukh ha-Rav based on the Tosafot and
Rabbeinu Yona in Berakhot who do not specify otherwise. But he also
brings the Tosafot in Sota who explicitly state that this requirement
applies exclusively to grace after meals. They ask why it is that the rest of
the blessings are not mentioned in the Mishna in Sota among those texts
which "may be recited in any language." They answer that the Mishna only
mentions those things which must be recited in an understood language, and it
would seem that the Mishna maintains that regarding other blessings, there is no
such limitation. Of course, their proof may be rejected, for it is possible that
the Mishna includes the other blessings under grace after meals, which serves as
their prototype.
The following practical conclusions emerge from this discussion: There
would have been room to say that regarding those blessings that must be recited
by Torah law (grace after meals, and perhaps also the blessing recited over the
Torah), if one recited the blessing without attention to its words, the blessing
must be repeated, for there is a disagreement whether he has fulfilled his
obligation, and in cases of uncertainty regarding a Torah law, we follow the
stringent opinion. In practice, however, it is clear that one should not act
in this manner, since the Posekim have noted that the general
practice follows Rashi, and women fulfill their obligation even when they don't
understand what they hear, and therefore the law is in accordance with this
position at least in pressing circumstances and bedi'avad (after the
fact). But in light of what has been said above, one should be especially
careful to pay attention to the meaning of the blessings, especially grace after
meals. This is certainly desirable regardless, but now it becomes clear that by
strict law as understood by some of the Rishonim, if one recites a
blessing without paying attention to its meaning, it is as if he has not recited
the blessing.
By the merit of reciting
blessings with a whole heart, may we merit a blessed life.
(Translated by David Strauss)
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!