2. Who can be Motzi others – Who Can Fulfill (Motzi) Blessings for Others::^[1]

A. Introduction:

The general rule is that only somebody who is obligated in the blessing is able to fulfill the obligation for another as will be explained throughout the laws below. Nonetheless, within this rule itself there is a difference in guideline between blessings said over a Mitzvah versus blessings said over pleasures, for which reason we have split the laws accordingly. First and foremost, however, we must define what blessings are considered Birchas Hamitzvos and which are considered Birchas Hanehnin.

Definition of Birchas Hamitzvos versus Birchas Hanehnin: Birchas Hamitzvos includes all blessings that are recited prior to the performance of a Mitzvah, such as prior to Tzitzis, Tefillin, Shofar, Sefira, Megillah, Shabbos candles, Chanukah candles, etc. However, Birchas Hamazon, and all blessings a person says before and after consumption of pleasures, are not included in the category of Birchas Hamitzvos but rather are in the category of Birchas Hanehnin which follows different, and more stringent, bylaws with regards to the laws of who can be Motzi another.^[2] The blessings of Kiddush of both night and day, [Havdalah], Matzah, are all considered similar to Birchas Hamitzvos with regards to these laws of Motzi Yotzei. This applies both to the blessing of Asher Kidishanu and the blessing of Hamotzi or Hagafen that is said on behalf of this Mitzvah.^[3] However, the blessing of Hamotzi over Lechem Mishneh on Shabbos and Yom Tov is considered Birchas Hanehnin and not Birchas Hamitzvos.^[4]

B. Birchas Hamitzvos:

Definition of Birchas Hamitzvos: See above in A.

One who is exempt from a Mitzvah:^[5] One who is exempt from a Mitzvah, such as a child or woman, cannot be Motzi others.^[6] This applies both to the Mitzvah or the blessing of the Mitzvah.

One who is only Rabbinically obligated in the Mitzvah [i.e. Deoraisa versus Chad Derabanan versus Trei Derabanan]:^[7] One can only be Motzi another in a Mitzvah if he is of equal, or greater, level obligation as the person who is being Yotzei with him. Thus, a child who has reached the age of Chinuch, or even the age of Bar or Bas Mitzvah but has yet to be verified to have brought two hairs, cannot fulfill the obligation of an adult who is Biblically obligated in the command. Likewise, a woman who is only Rabbinically obligated in a certain Mitzvah cannot fulfill the obligation of a man who is Biblically obligated. Likewise, some Poskim^[8] rule that one who is obligated Rabbinically as a Trei Derabanan cannot be Motzi one who is obligated as a Chad Derabanan. However, if both are Rabbinically obligated, even though the Rabbinical level obligation is due to different reasons [i.e. each are Chad Derabanan], then they can be Motzi each other.^[9] [Vetzaruch Iyun if this applies only to the Mitzvah, or even to the blessing of the Mitzvah, as the blessings of Mitzvahs are Rabbinical, and hence regarding the blessing they are of equal status.]

One who was already Yotzei, or is not currently being Yotzei, the Mitzvah:^[10] A person who already fulfilled his obligation of a Mitzvah, [or did not yet fulfill his obligation, but plans to only do so later on^[11]] may fulfill that Mitzvah on behalf of another who is equally obligated in that Mitzvah, to be Motzi him [i.e. blowing Shofar, read Megillah].^[12] This applies even to a man who was already Yotzei, being Motzi a woman.^[13] Nevertheless, regarding the blessing of the Mitzvah [i.e. Asher Kiddishanu, Kiddush, Havdalah], one who has already fulfilled his obligation of the Mitzvah [or did not yet fulfill his obligation, but plans to only do so later on^[14]] may only recite the blessing on behalf of another if that person is unable to recite the blessing himself.^[15] If, however, the other person knows how to recite the blessing, then he is to recite it himself rather than hear the blessings from a person who already fulfilled his obligation [or does not plan to currently do so].^[16] [All this is Lechatchila, however, Bedieved, if the person doing the Mitzvah for the other also recited the blessing instead of the listener, nevertheless the listener fulfills his obligation of the blessing.^[17]]

Minyan: There is no requirement to have a Minyan present in order to be Yotzei a blessing of a Mitzvah with another person.^[18] Nonetheless, due to other reasons, when a Minyan is not present, it is better for each person to say their own blessing rather than be Yotzei with another person.^[19]

• Example: Daniel and Eli are both adult men required to hear the shofar on Rosh Hashanah. Daniel already heard the shofar but recites the blessing and blows again because Eli cannot recite the blessing himself. Daniel can be Motzi Eli in both the mitzvah and the blessing.

Q&A What is the definition of not knowing how to recite the blessings?[20] Seemingly this means the person has difficulty verbalizing the Hebrew words or does not know the dialect of the blessing. There is no obligation for someone to read him the blessing and have him repeat the blessing after him.[21] However, some Poskim[22] write it is best to do so, although the person is not to say Hashem’s name.

C. Birchas Hanehnin:^[23]

Definition of Birchas Hanehnin: See above in A.

Kevius: By all Birchas Hanehnin, one cannot be Yotzei a blessing from another unless the group is Kavua together. This matter will be explained in Halacha ??.

Saying Birchas Hanehnin on behalf of another: Unlike the law by blessings over mitzvot, one who does not need to recite a blessing over a pleasure, cannot recite a blessing and fulfill the obligation on behalf of another person who is partaking in that pleasure.^[24] Thus, if one is not currently having a drink, then he may not say the blessing of Shehakol on behalf of another person who is having a drink in order to be Motzi him. This applies even if the other person does not know how to say the blessing himself. However, if he is also having a drink then he can be Motzi another person with his blessing of Shehakol. However, those blessings over pleasures which are required to be done due to them containing a Mitzvah, such as the saying of Kiddush, Havdalah, and eating Matzah, one may say a blessing on behalf of those who don’t know how to say the blessing themselves, as they are considered like Birchas Hamitzvos. However, the blessing of Hamotzi over Lechem Mishneh on Shabbos and Yom Tov is considered Birchas Hanehnin and not Birchas Hamitzvos.^[25]

• Example: Sarah is eating an apple, and Rachel is sitting beside her but not eating. Rachel cannot recite the “Borei Pri Ha’etz” blessing for Sarah, since she is not eating; only Sarah can say it. If both were eating apples together as a group, one could recite the blessing for both.

Saying an after blessings on behalf of another:^[26] The above law applies to both a before blessing and an after blessing. Thus, one may not recite an after blessing on behalf of a person who became obligated in an after blessing after eating a food or beverage, even if the other person does not know how to say the blessing themselves.

Saying Birchas Hamazon on behalf of another:^[27] The above law applies likewise to Birchas Hamazon, that one who did not eat a Kezayis of bread cannot be Motzi one who ate bread. However, an adult man who ate a Kezayis of bread can be Motzi one who also ate bread, even if the other person ate bread to the point of satiation and is hence biblically obligated in the after blessing.^[28] However, a woman and child who ate a Kezayis can only be Motzi a man if the man did not eat to the point of satiation.^[29] The above, however only applies Bedieved, or in a time of need, however initially, a person who ate bread to the point of satiation should only be Yotzei from someone who also ate bread to the point of satiation.^[30] Likewise, all the above only applies if the individual does not know how to say Birchas Hamazon, however, if he knows how to say it himself, then he may not fulfill his obligation with hearing it from another unless it is said with a Zimun.^[31]

Bedieved if said Birchas Hanehnin on behalf of another:^[32] Even Bedieved, an individual does not fulfill his obligation with a before or after blessing that was said on his behalf, if the person who said it was not personally obligated in saying that blessing.^[33] This applies even if both of them had in mind to be Yotzei, Motzei, and he answered Amen to his blessing.

Saying a blessing on behalf of a child:^[34] The one exception to the above rule is regarding a child, as it is permitted to recite a blessing on behalf of any child in order to educate them in Mitzvah’s. This applies even to someone else’s child. This applies even at times when the child is not eating or drinking and certainly applies prior to eating or drinking food. Hence, it is permitted for one to recite the blessing of Shehakol on behalf of a child who is having a drink, and the child is not required to say the blessing himself.

Being Yotzei with one who is saying the blessing on his own behalf:^[35] Although from the letter of the law one can fulfill his obligation for a before or after blessing on a food with another person saying a blessing on behalf of himself if they are Kavua together^[36], nonetheless, initially the custom is for one to personally recite a blessing over food or drink rather than hear it from another^[37], with exception to bread and wine in which case one may be Yotzei with another person who is also benefiting if they are Kavua together. This applies only to food or drink that does not involve a Mitzvah. The reason for this is because some Poskim^[38] rule that one cannot be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another with exception to bread and wine.^[39]

Can a child who is eating or drinking be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin? Some Poskim^[40] rule that children who are eating or drinking can be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin.^[41] However, from Admur^[42] it is implied that a child can only be Motzi an adult by the blessing of Birchas Hamazon and not by any other blessing.^[43]

D. Women:

Mitzvos that they are not obligated in – Being Motzi others:^[44] Although a woman may choose to recite a blessing prior to performing even Mitzvahs that they are exempt from^[45], nonetheless, a woman cannot fulfill a Mitzvah or its blessing on behalf of a man if she is not equally obligated in that Mitzvah. Thus, by all Mitzvah’s which women are exempt from fulfilling due to them being time-dependent, they cannot be Motzi men who are obligated in it. They cannot be Motzi them either in the fulfillment of the actual Mitzvah or its blessing. [Seemingly, they also cannot be Motzi other women if they had already fulfilled the Mitzvah, or do not plan on doing so until later on.^[46] Thus, for example, a woman who was already Yotzei the Mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, cannot say the blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the shofar.]

Mitzvos that they are not obligated in – Being Yotzei from others:^[47] Women who are exempt from a Mitzvah can only be Yotzei the blessing from others if that other individual is saying the blessing on behalf of themselves or on behalf of other people that are obligated in it. Thus, for example, a man or woman who was not yet Yotzei the Mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, may say the blessing on behalf of himself and likewise include be Motzi a woman who has yet to hear the shofar. However, a man or woman who was already Yotzei the Mitzvah of Shofar on Rosh Hashanah, cannot say the blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the shofar.^[48]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Yotzei from others:^[49] A woman who is obligated in a Mitzvah can be Yotzei the Mitzvah and its blessing through having another person, whether man or women, do so on their behalf. For example, a man or woman may read Megillah with a blessing on behalf of a woman who has yet to hear the Megillah. Likewise, a man or woman may recite Kiddush on behalf of a woman who has yet to be Yotzei Kiddush. This applies even if the man or woman who is reciting the blessing has already fulfilled their obligation and is repeating the Mitzvah and blessing just for the sake of the woman.^[50] However, in such a case, the blessing may only be repeated on her behalf in the event that she does not know how to say the blessing herself.^[51]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Motzi others:^[52] A woman who is obligated in a Mitzvah can be Motzi others who are obligated in that Mitzvah or its blessing. This applies even to being Motzi other men with her blessing. This applies even she has already fulfilled her obligation and is repeating the Mitzvah and blessing just for the sake of the other man or woman. ^[53] Nevertheless, it is not proper for a woman to be Motzi a man.^[54]

Birchas Hamazon:^[55] A woman who ate a Kezayis of bread can only be Motzi a man if the man did not eat to the point of satiation.^[56] Likewise, all the above only applies if the individual does not know how to say Birchas Hamazon, however, if he knows how to say it himself, then he may not fulfill his obligation with hearing it from another unless it is said with a Zimun.^[57]

• Example: Miriam is performing the mitzvah of lighting Shabbat candles and says the blessing out loud. Esther, who is also obligated, can listen and be Yotzei through Miriam’s blessing. However, Miriam cannot be Motzi her brother David in Lulav on Sukkot, since she is not obligated in that mitzvah.

E. Child:

Child saying on behalf of an adult – Mitzvah’s:^[58] A child cannot be Motzi an adult in a Mitzvah that the adult is obligated, in.^[59] This applies both to the Mitzvah or the blessing of the Mitzvah. Furthermore, a child who has reached the age of Chinuch, or even the age of Bar or Bas Mitzvah but has yet to be verified to bring two hairs, cannot fulfill the obligation of an adult who is Biblically obligated in the command.^[60]

Birchas Hanehnin: A child who ate a Kezayis of bread can be Motzi a man with Birchas Hamazon if the man did not eat to the point of satiation.^[61] Furthermore, even regarding other blessings some Poskim^[62] rule that child who is eating or drinking can be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin.^[63] However, from Admur^[64] it is implied that a child can only be Motzi an adult by the blessing of Birchas Hamazon and not by any other blessing.^[65]

• Example: Yonah, age 11, is eating bread and says Birchas Hamazon out loud. His friend Adam, an adult who only ate a small portion and did not reach satiation, can be Yotzei with Yonah’s blessing, but not if Adam ate to satiation.

Saying a blessing on behalf of a child:^[66] It is permitted to recite a blessing on behalf of any child in order to educate them in Mitzvah’s. This applies even to someone else’s child and applies even if the adult is not currently eating and applies even at times that the child is not eating or drinking and certainly applies prior to eating food or drinking . Hence, it is permitted for one to recite the blessing of Shehakol on behalf of a child who is having a drink, and the child is not required to say the blessing himself.

• Example: Leah, an adult, is at a birthday party with several children. She recites Shehakol for David, a 6-year-old about to drink juice, even though she herself is not drinking. This helps educate him in mitzvot, as permitted by halacha.

F. Birchas Hashevach – Morning Blessings:^[67]

One does not fulfill his obligation of the morning blessings through hearing them from another person, even if the other person has in mind to fulfill one’s obligation. If however one hears the blessings from a Chazan, in the presence of a Minyan which is listening to his blessings, then he fulfills his obligation.^[68]

• Example: At synagogue, Chazan Yosef recites the morning blessings for the minyan. The group, including Levi and Chaim, fulfills their obligation by listening, but if they are not in a minyan or only with one other person, each should recite the blessings themselves.

May one fulfill his obligation through hearing Birchas Hatorah said by another person? Yes.^[69] However, there are Poskim^[70] who learn in Admur that one does not fulfill his obligation unless it is said with a Minyan. One may fulfill his obligation of Birchas Hatorah through hearing the blessings said by a woman.^[71] However there are Poskim^[72] who are stringent and rule one may not fulfill his obligation through a woman. A child that has reached Chinuch cannot fulfill the obligation of an adult according to those who rule Birchas Hatorah is Biblical, and hence one is to avoid fulfilling his obligation with the blessing of a child.^[73]

• Example: Ezra recites the Birchas Hatorah, and his wife fulfills her obligation by listening to him. However, some authorities say Naomi should only rely on this if a minyan is present, and not from their son Ariel, who is under bar mitzvah age, and perhaps Ezra should not be Yotzei not from his wife Naomi.

Summary: General Principle: Only someone who is obligated in a particular blessing or mitzvah can fulfill (Motzi) the obligation for another. This rule is different for blessings over mitzvot (Birchas Hamitzvos) and blessings over physical pleasures (Birchas Hanehnin). Blessings Over Mitzvot: A person can only Motzi another if they share the same level of obligation (e.g., both are Biblically or Rabbinically obligated). If someone has already fulfilled their obligation, they may only say the blessing for someone else if that person cannot recite it themselves. No minyan is required, but it is preferable for each person to recite their own blessing if alone. Blessings Over Pleasures (Food, etc.): A person must be personally benefiting (eating/drinking) to Motzi another in such blessings, unless it is a mitzvah-related blessing like Kiddush. One may not recite after-blessings or Birchas Hamazon for another unless they also ate a Kezayis, with some exceptions for children. Women: Women cannot Motzi men in mitzvot they are not equally obligated in, and vice versa. Women can be Motzi others in mitzvot they are obligated in, but it is generally discouraged for a woman to Motzi a man. Children: Children cannot Motzi adults in mitzvot or blessings adults are obligated in, except for Birchas Hamazon if the adult did not eat to satiation. Adults may recite blessings for children to help them learn and fulfill mitzvot. Morning Blessings: One does not fulfill morning blessings by listening to another, except possibly from a chazan with a minyan. Torah Blessings A person can fulfill their obligation of Birchas Hatorah by hearing it from someone else, though some authorities require it to be recited with a minyan. One may fulfill their obligation through a woman’s blessing, but some are stringent and disagree. Adults should not fulfill their obligation through a child’s blessing.

Category	Who Can Be Motzi	Who Cannot Be Motzi	Special Cases/Notes
Birchas Hamitzvos (Blessings over Mitzvot)	Someone equally or more obligated (Biblically or Rabbinically); One who already fulfilled may Motzi another if the other cannot recite it	One exempt from the mitzvah (child, woman if not obligated); One with lesser obligation (Rabbinic vs. Biblical); Child not verified Bar/Bas Mitzvah	No minyan required; Preferable for each to say their own if alone; Bedieved, listener fulfills obligation even if not ideal
Birchas Hanehnin (Blessings over Pleasures)	Someone who is also benefiting (eating/drinking); For children, an adult may recite for education	One not eating/drinking; Even if the other cannot recite; After-blessings if not personally obligated	Exception for Kiddush, Havdalah, Matzah (treated like mitzvah); Birchas Hamazon: only if also ate Kezayis
Women	May Motzi others in mitzvot they are obligated in (even men, but not proper); May be Motzi if equally obligated	Cannot Motzi men in mitzvot they are not obligated in; Cannot Motzi others if already fulfilled or not planning to fulfill soon	Can be Yotzei from others if the other is saying for themselves or others obligated; Birchas Hamazon: Can only be Motzi if man did not eat to satiation
Children	Can Motzi adults in Birchas Hamazon if adult did not eat to satiation (Bedieved); Adult may recite blessings for children for education	Cannot Motzi adults in mitzvot/blessings adults are obligated in; Not even if child reached Chinuch or Bar/Bas Mitzvah unverified	Some Poskim allow child Motzi in Birchas Hanehnin; Admur implies only Birchas Hamazon
Morning Blessings (Birchas Hashevach)	Chazan with minyan (for others)	Another individual (not chazan/minyan)	Cannot fulfill obligation through another alone
Birchas Hatorah (Torah Blessings)	May be Yotzei by hearing from another;	Some Poskim: Only with minyan; Some Poskim: Not from a woman; Not from a child if Birchas Hatorah is Biblical	Best not to fulfill through a child; Some authorities are stringent
Blessing on behalf of a child	Permitted for adult to recite for any child (even not their own)		Applies even if adult not eating/drinking; Applies even if child not eating/drinking
Kevius (Fixed group)	Can be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another if group is Kavua together		Custom is for each to recite own blessing, except bread and wine

________________________________________________________

[1] For the general difference in laws of who can be Motzi who between Birchas Hamitzvos versus Birchas Hanehnin, See: Admur 167:23; 197:6; 213:3

[2] Admur 167:23

[3] Admur 167:23; 273:6; 484:1.

[4] Admur 167:23; 273:6

The reason: As even on Shabbos, eating is only a Mitzvah if one receives pleasure from it and is hence considered Birchas Hanehnin. [See Admur ibid]

[5] See regarding Tefillin: Admur 37:3; 39:1; See also 55:6; 128:49; See regarding blessings and Birchas Hamazon: Admur 167:23; 186:3; 197:6; 199:9; 213:3 See regarding Kiddush: Admur 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Havdalah: Admur 296:19; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1; See P”M 17 A”A 2; Kaf Hachaim 17:9;

[6] The reason: Since Hashem does not desire this person himself to perform the command, how can he fulfill the command on behalf of others. [Levush 589; Kaf Hachaim 589:2]

[7] See regarding Tefillin: Admur 37:3; 39:1; See also 55:6; 128:49; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 199:9; See regarding Kiddush: 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1; 9

[8] See Admur 186:3 regarding child, which implies that he rules that Chad cannot be Motzi Trei [with exception to Birchas Hamazon; See also Admur 197:6 and the two opinions there regarding Birchas Hamazon; See Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49 in length to understand the opinion of Admur]; Tosafus Megillah 19b; M”A 186:3; Degul Merivava 271; Rav Akiva Eiger Teshuvah 7; Derech Hachaim ibid; M”B 271:2; Chayeh Adam 5:23, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 271:2; Shaar Hatziyon 271:2 and 4; Kaf Hachaim 271:9

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a Trei Derabanan can be Motzi a Chad Derabanan. [See M”A 186:3 based on Pesachim 116b; P”M 213 A”A 7; 215 M”Z 3 regarding child being Motzi adults in blessings; Opinion in Admur 197:6 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49 that so is possible to learn also in Admur 186:3 that only a child is an exception to the rule]

See whether a child above Chinuch is defined as Chad or Trei Derabanan: All Poskim ibid; Admur ibid that with exception to Birchas Hamazon, he cannot be Motzi adult even if adult is Chad Derabanan as well.

[9] Admur 186:3 regarding Birchas Hamazon that a woman can fulfill the obligation of a man who ate only a Kezayis; Regarding Kiddush Friday night if adult Davened Maariv but not child above Bar Mitzvah: Degul Merivava 271; Rav Akiva Eiger Teshuvah 7; Derech Hachaim ibid; M”B 271:2; Chayeh Adam 5:23, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 271:2; Shaar Hatziyon 271:2 and 4; Kaf Hachaim 271:9

[10] See for general rule: Admur 167:23; Terumas Hadeshen 140; See regarding Tzitzis: Admur 8:11; M”A 8:8; P”M 8 A”A 8; Tehila Ledavid 8:3; Kaf Hachaim 8:21; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 186:3; So rule regarding Kiddush: Admur  269:3; 271:4; 273:6; Michaber 273:4; M”B 273:17 Ketzos Hashulchan 81:4; 96:5; Kitzur Halachos Shabbos p. 114 and 164, 273:42 footnote 69; 296 footnote 32; SSH”K 51:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 273:5; Koveitz Hearos Ubiurim Tzemach Tzedek 7:87; Hearos Ubiurim Oholei Torah 1024 p. 56; 1025 p. 65; 1026 p. 74; 1028 p. 79; So rule regarding Havdalah: Admur 296:17; 297:8; Kuntrus Achron 272:2; So rule regarding Shofar: Admur 585:5; M”A 585:3 based on Terumas Hadeshen 140; Opinion in M”B 585:5; Machatzis Hashekel 585; P”M 585 A”A 3; Derech Hachaim 2 regarding Shofar; Mateh Efraim 585:6; Chayeh Adam 141:7; Kaf Hachaim 585:21; So rule regarding Chanukah: P”M 676 A”A 4; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeishev 6; Kaf Hachaim 675:9; [See however M”A 676:4 in name of Hagahos Maimanis and Kaf Hachaim 676:13 that one person can light and another can say the blessing, and they do not state that it’s better for the person to say the blessing rather than the emissary.] So rule regarding Megillah: Opinion in M”B 692:10; Kaf Hachaim 692:14 and 25; See Derech HaChaim 3; Minchas Yitzchak 3:53-54; Salmas Chaim 269; Luach Tukichinsky; Kinyan Torah 3:103; See Sdei Chemed R”R 2:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 692:7 that so is custom today

Background: The Rama 585:2 rules that the blower is to recite both blessings whether he is blowing for himself, to fulfill his personal obligation, or whether he is blowing for others. The M”A 585:3 brings the Terumas Hadeshen [140] who rules that it is always better for the listener to recite the blessing, although he concludes that the custom is that the blower recites it. Regarding Shehechiyanu the Terumas Hadeshen does not discuss who is to recite it. The Rambam, Mateh Moshe, Mahriv and Hagahos Maimanis rule that the listener is to recite it while the Beis Yosef writes that the custom is for the blower to recite it. It is based on these two customs written in the Terumas Hadeshen and Beis Yosef that the Rama here writes that the blower is to recite both blessings. Nevertheless the M”A ibid concludes that this custom only applies if the listener does not know how to recite the blessing however if the listener knows how to recite it, then he is to do so and he then fulfills his obligation according to all. The ruling of Admur here follows the ruling of the M”A ibid.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the person may always say a blessing for the other even if he knows how to recite the blessing. [Rama 585:2 regarding Shofar; Michaber 692:3; Beis Yosef 585 that so is custom; Elya Raba brought in Kaf Hachaim ibid; See also Rama 671:7; M”A 671:11; Kaf Hachaim 676:13 who implies the person saying the blessing is to always be the person lighting]

Ruling of the M”B: The M”B 585:5 rules that the custom is to be lenient, and one is not to protest their opinion as so is the main opinion. The Kaf Hachaim 585:21 questions this ruling of the M”B as majority of Poskim ibid rule that it is to initially be said by the listener. However see Minchas Yitzchak ibid that explains the M”B did not mean to say that most Poskim initially rule this way.

[11] See Admur 273:6

[12] See regarding Shofar: Admur 591:1; Michaber 591:1; M”B 594:1; Kaf Hachaim 589:1; See regarding Kiddush, Megillah: Poskim ibid

[13] The law of Areivus for women: There is a debate regarding the question if at all a person can be Motzi a woman if he or she already fulfilled his or her obligation, even if for certain both are obligated in the Mitzvah: See the following Poskim regarding a debate if women are included in the Mitzvah of Areivus, and can hence be Motzi others if they were already Yotzei: Rosh and Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 20b [no Areivus]; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797 [There is Areivus]; Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4 [questionable]; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzalach Brachos 20b [No Areivus]; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7 [There is Areivus]; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20 [Permitted]; The following Poskim all rule she is considered within Areivus: Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate; In 296 footnote 207 he concludes to initially be stringent

[14] See Admur 273:6; Thus, if one is blowing for other Jews prior to Shacharis and he plans to fulfill the Mitzvah during Davening, the listeners are to recite the blessings if they have knowledge in how to do so.

[15] The reason it is allowed in such a case: Although the person who is saying the blessing is not fulfilling the Mitzvah at the moment, and hence does not need the blessing, nevertheless since all the Jewish people are guarantors to each other, therefore it ends up that he too needs this blessing now [due to his obligation of a guarantor]. (It is for this reason that it is accustomed for the Chazan to recite the blessing [over Tzitzis] aloud in order to fulfill the obligation of one who is not an expert.) This same law applies by the blessings of all Mitzvos. [Admur ibid]

[16] The reason: This follows the general rule that the blessings are to be recited by one who is currently fulfilling his obligation of the Mitzvah. [273:6] The Terumas Hadeshen 140 explains that since the Mitzvah is to hear the sound of the Shofar and both the blower and listener are equally fulfilling this action of hearing, therefore it is better for the listener to recite the blessing since he is fulfilling his obligation with the hearing. [This is unlike the law of placing a Mezuzah for another person in which case the person placing the Mezuzah says the blessing, as in that case he is the only person doing the action as opposed to the owner of the house.]  

[17] Admur 273:6; Terumos Hadeshen 140

[18] Admur 59:4 “An individual may not be Motzi another individual with a blessing with exception to Birchas Hanehnin and Birchas Hamitzvos. And the like of all other blessings, however by Birchas Shema and Birchas Hashevach, a Minyan is required”; Admur 8:11 “If a few people are wearing the Tallis simultaneously, each one says their own blessing each person is to say the blessing on his own, although if they want, they can choose to have one person say the blessing, and the remainder will listen and answer Amen.” See regarding Shofar: Admur 591:1; Michaber 591:1; M”B 594:1; See Admur 213:6 regarding if a Minyan is not present by Megillah reading, it is still better for one person to read and say the blessing on behalf of all; M”A ibid and Admur 8:11 and 213:6 never conditions being Yotzei with someone on a Minyan being present

The ruling in Admur 489:1: Admur 489:1 writes that one may be Yotzei with the blessing of the Chazan being that “As when there are ten Jews doing a Mitzvah together one Jew is able/allowed to say the blessing on behalf of all the congregants, as explained in 8:11.” This implies that if a Minyan is not present [ten Jews] then one may not be Yotzei, or is not allowed to be Yotzei, with another person’s blessing. This clearly contradicts the notion established in all the other sources in Admur and Poskim that a Minyan is never a prerequisite to being Yotzei a Mitzvah or blessing. To note that in M”A ibid, as well as 8:11 no mention is made of that this is limited to the presence of a Minyan. In truth however, one can explain as follows: Admur here in 489:1 never intended to say that a Minyan is required in order to be Yotzei. Rather the intention is to say that in order for it to be initially allowed to be Yotzei with another rather than say it on one’s own, one needs a Minyan present, as otherwise there is not as much of a Berov Am, and the advantage of increasing in necessary blessings overrides the advantage of Berov Am of less than a Minyan. Only when there is a Minyan do we say the advantage of Berov Am is equal to the advantage of increasing in necessary blessings, and hence there is no precedence to one over the other. [See Admur 213:6 for a discussion of the advantage of Berov Am versus the advantage of increasing in necessary blessings] On this Admur ibid intended to say that when there is a Minyan one can choose to be Yotzei with the Chazan, as if there isn’t a Minyan it is better to say it oneself. See more sources for this distinction in next footnote.

[19] Admur 489:1 as explained in previous footnote; M”A 213:7 and Tosefta Brachos 6:20 “Ten people who are doing a Mitzvah together”, implying that less than ten does not contain Berov Am; This can also be implied from Admur 8:11 and Michaber 8:5 who rules “If a few people are wearing the Tallis simultaneously, each one says their own blessing each person is to say the blessing on his own, although if they want, they can choose to have one person say the blessing, and the remainder will listen and answer Amen.”, now from the fact that Admur: Michaber plainly stated that each one should say the blessing on their own implies that it is preferable.

[20] So is implied from M”A 585:3; See Background.

[21] Pashut as otherwise all the above Poskim would have simply stated for this to be done; Furthermore, perhaps from the fact that the Poskim do not mention this option one can derive that it is forbidden to do so, being that at least one person is saying a Bracha Levatala when one says it after the other word for word. See Admur 215:2 “Although it is forbidden for a Gadol to be taught [the blessings].” However, seemingly there it only refers when the Gadol does not currently need to say the blessing, however when he needs to say the blessing then perhaps it is permitted to teach him and have him repeat word for word. [so is implied from explanation of Rebbe in Igros Kodesh 3:138] Furthermore, the Tur in name of the Rosh explicitly rules that by Birchas Hamazon one may recite the blessing word after word for the other. Although perhaps Birchas Hamazon is an exception, Vetzaruch Iyun!

[22] Kaf Hachaim 8:21

[23] See Admur 167:23; 197:6; 213:3; 273:6; Michaber 167:19; 213:2; Rosh Hashanah 29a; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Brachos Vol. 4 p. 344-350

[24] The reason: As a Jew is only considered personally liable to the blessing which is obligated by another Jew due to being considered a guarantor for the Mitzvah’s of another Jew. This is in contrast to pleasures of which it is the person’s decision to partake or not, and we are not considered guarantors of another person’s pleasures. [See Admur 167:23] This disqualification is Rabbinical and is based on the verse which states “Veachalta Vesavata,” which implies that only one who ate may say a blessing on behalf of another. [Admur 197:6]

[25] Admur 167:23; M”A 167:41

The reason: As even on Shabbos, eating is only a Mitzvah if one receives pleasure from it and is hence considered Birchas Hanehnin. [See Admur ibid]

[26] Admur 213:3

The Biblical law: This rule is only rabbinical, as biblically one is able to recite Birchas Hamazon on behalf of another person even if he did not himself eat any bread as the person has already become obligated in the blessing and every Jew is a guarantor to make sure that he says the after blessing, and it is only the sages who disqualified this ability. This disqualification is based on the verse which states “Veachalta Vesavata,” which implies that only one who ate may say a blessing on behalf of another. [Admur 197:6]

[27] See Admur 186:3; 197:6

[28] 1^st opinion in Admur 197:3

[29] Admur 186:3

[30] 2^nd opinion in Admur 197:3 and final ruling

[31] Admur 186:4

[32] Admur 213:3

[33] The reason: As although we have a rule which states that one who hears is like one who said [i.e. Shomeia Keoneh], nevertheless, since the blessing of the person who said it was in vain, therefore it is considered that one heard an improper blessing. [Admur ibid]

[34] Admur 167:23; 215:3; Michaber 167:19; Rosh Hashanah 29a

[35] Admur 213:1; Michaber 213:1

[36] 1^st and main opinion Admur ibid

[37] Custom based on 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; Rama 213:1

[38] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:1; Rama 213:1; Raavad Brachos 1:12; Brachos 43a

[39] See Admur 213:1

[40] P”M 213 A”A 7; 215 M”Z 3  

[41] The reason: As blessings are only Rabbinical and hence a child who is obligated rabbinically to say the blessing due to the Mitzvah of education may do so on behalf of an adult who is also on the rabbinically obligated. [P”M ibid] This follows the opinions who rule that a Trei Derabanan can be Motzi a Chad Derabanan. [See M”A 186:3 based on Pesachim 116b; Opinion in Admur 197:6 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49 that so is possible to learn also in Admur 186:3 that only a child is an exception to the rule]

[42] See Admur 186:3 from whom it is implied that only by Birchas Hamazon can he fulfill the obligation of others were only rabbinically obligated being that it will become biblical for him when he is older, thus implying that by all other blessings, since they will always be rabbinical even when he is older, therefore he cannot fulfill the obligation of adults. Vetzaruch Iyun! See Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49

[43] The reason: As a Trei Derabanan cannot be Motzi a Chad Derabanan. [Tosafus Megillah 19b; M”A 186:3; Degul Merivava 271; Rav Akiva Eiger Teshuvah 7; Derech Hachaim ibid; M”B 271:2; Chayeh Adam 5:23, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 271:2; Shaar Hatziyon 271:2 and 4; Kaf Hachaim 271:9]

[44] See Admur 186:2; 296:19 regarding Havdalah; Brachos 20b; P”M 17 A”A 2; Kaf Hachaim 17:9; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 199:9; See regarding Kiddush: 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1;

[45] Admur 17:3 [Tzitzis]; Kuntrus Achron 489:1; 296:19 [Havdalah]; 489:2 [Sefiras Haomer]; 589:2 [Shofar]; 640:2 [Sukkah]; Rama 589:6; Taz 658:9; M”A 658:11; M”B 655:1; Rabbeinu Tam R”H 33a; Ran; Rosh in name of Mahritz Geios; Tur 589; Ritva Sukkah 2; Rashba 123; Maggid Mishneh Shofar 2 in name of Rashba; Shut Min Hashamayim 1; Birkeiy Yosef 654:2; Yosef Ometz 82; See Kaf Hachaim 17:4; 589:23

Other Opinions-Sephardim: Some Poskim rule that women may never recite a blessing over any Mitzvah that they are not obligated in. [Michaber 589:6; Beis Yosef 589; Rambam Hilchos Tzitzis; Igur in name of Reb Yeshaya; Rashi, brought in Hagahos on Rambam; Chacham Tzvi] The Michaber ibid rules that they cannot say a blessing as Safek Brachos Lehakel. [Beis Yosef 589] The Birkeiy Yosef ibid states that after seeing the answer from heaven in Shut Min Hashamayim he retracted from ruling like the Michaber and would tell women to recite a blessing. He concludes that if the Michaber would have seen the Shut Min Hashamayim certainly he too would have retracted his ruling.

[46] So rule the following question regarding a man say the blessing for a woman, and the same logic should apply even more so regarding a woman saying on behalf of another woman: Shofar: Admur 589:2; 640:2 [Lulav]; Rama 589:6; Darkei Moshe 589:2; Havdalah: Admur 296:19, in suspicion for 2nd opinion there; M”A 296:11; Elya Raba 296:18; Toras Chesed Teshuvos Hamafteichos; Beis Dovid 491;  M”B 296:36; Kaf Hachaim 296:54 based on Zechor Leavraham 1 Erech Havdalah; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[47] See Admur 296:19 [Havdalah]; 589:2 [Shofar]; 640:2 [Lulav]; Rama 589:6; Darkei Moshe 589:2; M”A 296:11; Elya Raba 296:18; Toras Chesed Teshuvos Hamafteichos; Beis Dovid 491; M”B 296:36; Kaf Hachaim 296:54 based on Zechor Leavraham 1 Erech Havdalah; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[48] The reason: Women who are not obligated in a command are likewise not commanded to say the blessing. Thus, a man has no obligation to recite the blessing for them to fulfill this optional Mitzvah. In such a case, if a man says the blessing for women, it is considered a needless blessing and is hence defined as a blessing in vain. However, women themselves can choose to say the blessing for reasons explained in previous footnotes. [Admur 589:2] Vetzaruch Iyun as to how to understand this reason. Why can’t men say this optional blessing for women just like women can say it for themselves? In other words, if we permit an optional blessing for women why can’t we also permit it for men to say for the sake of women. Perhaps the reason is because since the blessing is optional and the man gains nothing for saying it [not even an exemption from Areivus], it is therefore considered an unnecessary blessing for him to say. However, women may say it being that she gains the fulfillment of the Mitzvah and hence it is not unnecessary. 

[49] See Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzalach Brachos 20b; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20; Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate

[50] Other opinions – The law of Areivus for women: There is a debate regarding the question if at all a person can be Motzi a woman if he or she already fulfilled his or her obligation, even if for certain both are obligated in the Mitzvah: See the following Poskim regarding a debate if women are included in the Mitzvah of Areivus, and can hence be Motzi others if they were already Yotzei: Rosh and Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 20b [no Areivus]; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797 [There is Areivus]; Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4 [questionable]; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzalach Brachos 20b [No Areivus]; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7 [There is Areivus]; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 271:7; 675:20 [Permitted]; The following Poskim all rule she is considered within Areivus: Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate; In 296 footnote 207 he concludes to initially be stringent

The law if she has yet to fulfill her obligation: In the event that the woman saying the blessing has yet to fulfill her own obligation and is doing so also on her own behalf, then everyone agrees that a man fulfills his obligation with hearing the blessing from her, as Shomeia Keoneh, and the concept of Areivus is only needed in a case that the person saying the blessing has already fulfilled their obligation. [See Admur 213:3; 8:11; 167:23; 197:6; M”A 167:40; 213:7]

[51] See for general rule: Admur 167:23; Terumas Hadeshen 140; See regarding Tzitzis: Admur 8:11; M”A 8:8; P”M 8 A”A 8; Tehila Ledavid 8:3; Kaf Hachaim 8:21; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 186:3; So rule regarding Kiddush: Admur  269:3; 271:4; 273:6; Michaber 273:4; M”B 273:17 Ketzos Hashulchan 81:4; 96:5; Kitzur Halachos Shabbos p. 114 and 164, 273:42 footnote 69; 296 footnote 32; SSH”K 51:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 273:5; Koveitz Hearos Ubiurim Tzemach Tzedek 7:87; Hearos Ubiurim Oholei Torah 1024 p. 56; 1025 p. 65; 1026 p. 74; 1028 p. 79; So rule regarding Havdalah: Admur 296:17; 297:8; Kuntrus Achron 272:2; So rule regarding Shofar: Admur 585:5; M”A 585:3 based on Terumas Hadeshen 140; Opinion in M”B 585:5; Machatzis Hashekel 585; P”M 585 A”A 3; Derech Hachaim 2 regarding Shofar; Mateh Efraim 585:6; Chayeh Adam 141:7; Kaf Hachaim 585:21; So rule regarding Chanukah: P”M 676 A”A 4; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeishev 6; Kaf Hachaim 675:9; [See however M”A 676:4 in name of Hagahos Maimanis and Kaf Hachaim 676:13 that one person can light and another can say the blessing, and they do not state that it’s better for the person to say the blessing rather than the emissary.] So rule regarding Megillah: Opinion in M”B 692:10; Kaf Hachaim 692:14 and 25; See Derech HaChaim 3; Minchas Yitzchak 3:53-54; Salmas Chaim 269; Luach Tukichinsky; Kinyan Torah 3:103; See Sdei Chemed R”R 2:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 692:7 that so is custom today

[52] See Admur 186:1 [Birchas Hamazon]; 271:6 [Kiddush]; 296:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:28; 186:1; See regarding Chanukah lighting: Michaber 675:3; M”A 675:4; Taz 675:4; Agudah; Bach; Kneses Hagedola; Levush; Olas Shabbos 675:1; Peri Chadash 675; Elya Raba 675:6; Shulchan Gavoa 675:6; Machazik Bracha 675:4; M”B 675:9; Kaf Hachaim 675:19

[53] M”B 675:9; Kaf Hachaim 675:20

Other opinions – The law of Areivus for women: There is a debate regarding the question if at all a person can be Motzi a woman if he or she already fulfilled his or her obligation, even if for certain both are obligated in the Mitzvah: See the following Poskim regarding a debate if women are included in the Mitzvah of Areivus, and can hence be Motzi others if they were already Yotzei: Rosh and Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 20b [no Areivus]; Ritva Brachos 5:2 and Mordechai Megillah 797 [There is Areivus]; Admur 186:2; 263 KU”A 5; 271:3; 296:19; 608:4-5 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; P”M 271 A”A 2; 689 A”A 4 [questionable]; Degul Merivava 271 and Tzalach Brachos 20b [No Areivus]; Rav Akiva Eiger 271 and Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 7 [There is Areivus]; M”B 271:5; 273:20; 675:9; 692:10-11 [All these sources implies there is Areivus and she can be Motzi]; Biur Halacha 689 “Venashim”; Kaf Hachaim 675:20 [Permitted]; The following Poskim all rule she is considered within Areivus: Chasam Sofer 271; Rosh Yosef Brachos ibid; Avnei Nezer 439; Shaar Hatziyon 271:9; Minchas Yitzchak 3:54; Har Tzvi 2:122; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnote 89 and 92 for the full list of Poskim on each side of the debate; In 296 footnote 207 he concludes to initially be stringent

[54] See Brachos 20b and Sukkah 38a one whose wife says blessings for him, even though he is Yotzei, “A curse will befall his home.”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:8 footnotes 99-100 See regarding Kiddush: Admur 271:6; Michaber 271:2; Kol Bo 31; M”A 271:2; Aguda Shavuos 9; Rav Poalim Sod Yesharim 3:6; M”B 271:4; See regarding Hallel: M”A 422:5; Kaf Hachaim 422:28; Biur Halacha 422:2 “Hallel”; Mishneh Sukkah 38a; Brachos 20b; Chanukah candles: Biur Halacha 675:2 “Isha”

[55] See Admur 186:3; 197:6

[56] Admur 186:3

[57] Admur 186:4

[58] See regarding Tefillin: 37:3; 39:1; See also 55:6; 128:49; See regarding blessings and Birchas Hamazon: 167:23; 186:3; 197:6; 199:9; 213:3 See regarding Kiddush: 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Havdalah: Admur 296:19; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1; See P”M 17 A”A 2; Kaf Hachaim 17:9;

[59] The reason: Since Hashem does not desire this person himself to perform the command, how can he fulfill the command on behalf of others. [Levush 589; Kaf Hachaim 589:2]

[60] See regarding Tefillin: 37:3; 39:1; See also 55:6; 128:49; See regarding Birchas Hamazon: 199:9; See regarding Kiddush: 271:7; M”A 271:2; M”B 271:3; Rav Poalim 1:10; Kaf Hachaim 271:9; See regarding Shofar: Admur 588:6; Michaber 589:1; 9

[61] Admur 186:3

[62] P”M 213 A”A 7; 215 M”Z 3  

[63] The reason: As blessings are only Rabbinical and hence a child who is obligated rabbinically to say the blessing due to the Mitzvah of education may do so on behalf of an adult who is also on the rabbinically obligated. [P”M ibid] This follows the opinions who rule that a Trei Derabanan can be Motzi a Chad Derabanan. [See M”A 186:3 based on Pesachim 116b; Opinion in Admur 197:6 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49 that so is possible to learn also in Admur 186:3 that only a child is an exception to the rule]

[64] See Admur 186:3 from whom it is implied that only by Birchas Hamazon can he fulfill the obligation of others were only rabbinically obligated being that it will become biblical for him when he is older, thus implying that by all other blessings, since they will always be rabbinical even when he is older, therefore he cannot fulfill the obligation of adults. Vetzaruch Iyun! See Koveitz Oholei Torah 808 pp. 44-49

[65] The reason: As a Trei Derabanan cannot be Motzi a Chad Derabanan. [Tosafus Megillah 19b; M”A 186:3; Degul Merivava 271; Rav Akiva Eiger Teshuvah 7; Derech Hachaim ibid; M”B 271:2; Chayeh Adam 5:23, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 271:2; Shaar Hatziyon 271:2 and 4; Kaf Hachaim 271:9]

[66] Admur 167:23; 215:3; Michaber 167:19; Rosh Hashanah 29a

^[67] Admur 59:4; based on Levush 6:4 and 59:4; brought in M”A 6:10 and 59:8; So rules also Chayeh Adam 5; and so brings M”B 59:23; Ketzos Hashulchan 5 footnote 9

Other Opinions: The P”M 6 A”A 10 learns that the M”A 59:8 rules one fulfills his obligation even without a Minyan.

[68] Although by blessings said over food and Mitzvos one can fulfill his obligation through hearing someone else say the blessing, if that person is having him in mind, nevertheless this is not valid by the morning blessings. One can only fulfill his obligation of the morning blessings by either reciting them himself or hearing them from someone who is saying them in the presence of another nine people which are listening and answering amen after them. The reason for this is because the morning blessings are blessings of praise and thanks, and therefore if one does not plan to recite them himself, they need to be heard with a congregation, as this contains splendor towards the King which he is praising. They are thus similar to the blessings of prayer which one can only fulfill his obligation through hearing them in the presence of a Minyan. [ibid]

The blessing of Netilas Yadayim: One can fulfill his obligation through hearing someone else say the blessings of Netilas Yadayim even if it not being said in the presence of a Minyan. [Ketzos Hashulchan 5 footnote 9; Rebbe in Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag volume 1 page 25] The reason for this is because it is not a blessing of praise but of a Mitzvah and thus it is not included in this regard within “Birchas Hashachar.

The blessing of Elokei Neshama: The Ketzos Hashulchan ibid writes that according to Admur one does not fulfill his obligation through hearing Elokei Neshama said by another person. However the Rebbe [Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag volume 1 page 25] writes that one can fulfill his obligation through hearing someone else say the blessings of Netilas Yadayim and Elokei Neshama. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol. Perhaps one can say that the Rebbe intended that one should hear these blessings from the Chazan within the presence of a Minyan.

The blessing of Birchas Hatorah: See next chapter Halacha 14 Q&A!

[69] Admur 47:7; Accordingly, the ruling in 59:4 does not include Birchas Hatorah.

[70] Grach Naah in Shvil Hachaim on Derech Chaim 4:5 based on Admur 59:4 that one does not fulfill the morning blessings through hearing them from another unless he hears it with a Minyan. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol as according to this understanding that the ruling in 59:4 includes Birchas Hatorah there is an explicit contradiction between the ruling in 47:7 and 59:4. [One cannot explain that Rav Naah is going according to the ruling of the Siddur that Birchas Hatorah is just like all other Birchas Hashachar and thus one cannot fulfill his obligation by hearing someone else say them, as if this were the case why would Admur suggest in 47:7 to hear the blessing from someone else in order to be stringent like the other opinion, if according to the custom one can only fulfill his obligation if he himself says it. It is very difficult to establish that Admur in 47:7 is referring to hearing the blessing from the Chazan with a Minyan in which case one fulfills his obligation even by the morning blessings.]

[71] Peri Megadim 47 M”Z 1; From Biur Halacha “Nashim” it is understood that all those that hold of the reasons mentioned in Admur agree with the ruling of the Peri Megadim, and hence according to Admur this is allowed.

[72] Biur Halacha 47 “Nashim”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 47:18

[73] Peri Megadim ibid; Biur Halacha 47 “Nashim”