Berakhot 155

Today we continue with the discussion on questions and comments that have been received of late:-

In Berakhot 153 I wrote: From the halakhic point of view there is a difference between the two berakhot. When the person reciting the berakhah is the sole beneficiary, the only person sharing this very personal joy, the correct berakhah is "she-hecheyanu". However, when other people are also beneficiaries, when other people are sharing in this person's happiness (or if it is their happiness too) then the correct berakhah is "ha-Tov ve-ha-Metiv": "Praised be … He Who is good and does good" – 'Who has been good to me and Who has done good to others as well'.

Ron Kaminsky asks:

Why, then, is the berakhahshe-hecheyaNU posed in plural language? Is this some kind of linguistic convention?

I respond:

Firstly, I did explain that this berakhah serves at least three purposes. When it serves as Birkat ha-Zeman [a berakhah recited when doing something for the first time annually or seasonally] it refers to all Israel. For example, the festival of Pesaĥ does not arrive just for me, but it arrives for the whole Jewish people. It would seem that this was the original function of this berakhah; when it was later "borrowed" for the two other purposes its text remained unchanged.

Secondly, in common with almost all our prayers, almost all the berakhot are phrased in the plural because the life of all Jews in inextricably bound up each with the other. I share the woes of my fellow Jews and they share my joys. I do not pray for me; I pray for us. Similarly with berakhot in the vast majority of cases.

I also wrote: The Gemara [Berakhot 59b] gives the classic example of someone hearing that their father has died and that they have inherited his millions. In such circumstances the person hearing the news should recite two berakhot: firstly "Dayyan ha-Emet" [Praised be … the truthful Judge"] over the death of his father, and then the berakhah "ha-Tov ve-ha-Metiv" over his inheritance.

Ron seems to think that this is not sufficiently clear and asks:

If I, and only I, win a large amount of money in the lottery, do I recite "she-hecheyanu" or "ha-tov ve-ha-metiv"?

I respond:

That depends on how you feel. If you feel that your happiness is purely personal and that it is no one else's business (even your wife's!) then I suppose that you could recite she-heĥeyanu; if you feel that others are happy with you then you should recite ha-tov ve-ha-metiv.

---

Still concerning the berakhah she-heĥeyanu, Israel Man writes:

Concerning She-hecheyanu on eating the first fruit of the season. Once upon a time it was simple but what do you do to-day when due to import and/or refrigiration the supply is continuous?

I respond:

If you are eating this fruit all year round then recite no berakhah, because in the instance that you have brought you would have no means of knowing when the fruit was picked. A general rule of thumb is safek berakhot le-hakel: when there is any halakhic doubt as to whether a berakhah should or should not be said it should not be recited at all. If you feel a strong need to recite a berakhah you could recite she-heĥeyanu without shem u-malkhut (which I explained in our last shiur).

Israel also writes:

You said that the brakha is said only on owning something for the first time and not on additional new item (the car example). What about clothings? I know from practice that the brakha is recited every time a new item is worn. (Therefore as a Hazzan I wear a new shirt on the 2nd evening of Rosh Hashanna to enable me to say the "safek she-hechyanu" for the 2nd day).

I respond:

See what I wrote above concerning safek. However, concerning the 2nd day of Rosh ha-Shanah there is no safek! Even in Israel the festival is observed for two days, and our sages described these two days as technically being yoma ĥad arikhta [one long day (of 48 hours)]. No less a prestigious personality than the great Ga'on of Vilna described the custom of finding "an excuse" for reciting she-heĥeyanu on the 2nd night of Rosh ha-Shanah as minhag ta'ut [an erroneous custom], and states quite categorically that Birkat ha-Zeman should be recited unconditionally.

---

Ze'ev Orzech asks:

If it is true that praying for someone's health is a brakhah levattalah, why is it we say that, "Repentance, Prayer and Charity avert the evil of the decree?"

I respond:

No one – certainly not I – has ever suggested that one should not pray for someone else's health. This is part of the mitzvah of Bikkur Ĥolim [Visiting the Sick]. Even if it is known that someone is suffering from a terminal illness it is permissible and praiseworthy to pray for their full recovery. What we may not do is to pray that something that has already happened not to have happened. Their complete recovery is something that has not yet happened, therefore it most certainly may be prayed for. The nature of a diagnosis on the other hand is something that has already happened and we may not pray for it to be changed.

Next Shiur