Chapter 4: Being Yotzei a blessing with others[1]

1. The general rule:

It is not intrinsically necessary for an individual to personally recite a blessing in order to fulfill his obligation of that blessing and it is possible under certain conditions for him to fulfill his obligation of the blessing through hearing another person saying the blessing. The basis behind the possibility for one to fulfill a blessing through hearing it said by another person is due to two joint rules:

• Shomeia Keoneh, which is a rule which states that words which are heard from others are considered as if one has said them himself.[2]
• The laws of Areivus or Guarantor, which states that all Jews are guarantors of each other, and hence it ends up that when one Jew is obligated in the saying of a blessing, all Jews who are guarantors are in essence also obligated in making sure that this Jew fulfills his blessing, and hence they can say the blessing on his behalf.[3]

The conditions: Nevertheless, there are several rules and regulations which exist regarding how and when a person fulfills his obligation through hearing the blessing from another person. For example, does the other person’s age or gender make a difference? Does the other person status of obligation make a difference? Is a Minyan necessary? May one do so even if he knows how to say the blessing himself? There are several nuanced differences in these laws which often depend on the type of blessing that one desires to be Yotzei. All this and more will be elaborated on throughout this chapter. The following is a list of conditions that will be explored throughout this chapter that are necessary to be met in order to fulfill a blessing with a blessing that is said by another person:

1. Level of obligation: The person saying the blessing must also be obligated in the blessing, as explained in Halacha 2.
2. Did not yet fulfill obligation: If a person who is obligated already fulfilled his obligation, then in the question of whether he may repeat the blessing on behalf of another, there is a distinction regarding blessings over mitzvahs versus blessings over pleasures, that by blessings over mitzvahs the blessing may only be repeated if the person does not know how to say the blessing himself, while by blessings over pleasure, the blessing may not be repeated at all, as explained in Halacha 2.
3. Kavana – Intent: Both the listener and person saying the blessing must have intent to be Yotzei Motzi, as explained in Halacha 7.
4. Hearing all words: In order to fulfill his obligation the listeners must hear all of the words of the blessing from beginning to end, as explained in Halacha 6.
5. Minyan: By certain blessings, such as blessings of praise and prayer, it is necessary to have a Minyan, as explained in Halacha 2-3.
6. Kevius: By blessing over pleasures, it is required for the individuals to be seated together in a way that is defined as Kevius in order to fulfill their obligation, as explained in Halacha 5. Due to this, one is initially to never fulfill his obligation of Birchas Hanehnin with the blessing of another with exception to the before blessing of Hamotzi and wine.

Birchas Hamitzos – General rule: Unlike Birchas Hanehnin, one can even initially be Yotzei an after blessing of Birchas Hamitzvos from another if the proper conditions are fulfilled. By Birchas Hamitzvos, there are much less conditions that must be met than by Birchas Hanehnin.

Birchas Hanehnin – Before blessing:[4] Some Poskim[5] rule that one cannot be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another with exception to the blessings said over bread and wine if the proper conditions are fulfilled.[6] Practically, the main opinion follows the lenient opinion if the proper conditions are fulfilled, although the custom is for every person to say their own blessing by all foods and drinks other than bread and wine, and not fulfill their obligation with the blessing of others.

Birchas Hanehnin – After blessing:[7] Initially, one cannot be Yotzei an after blessing of Birchas Hanehnin [i.e. Borei Nefashos, Meiyn Gimel] from another with exception to Birchas Hamazon.[8] However, Bedieved, if one heard an after blessing from another, then it is valid if the proper conditions are fulfilled. Furthermore, if someone does not know how to say an after blessing, then he may even initially fulfill his obligation with the after blessing of another if the proper conditions are fulfilled. For this reason, in today’s times that there are many who belittle the saying of an after blessing, so is to be done even initially that one person say the after blessing out loud in order to fulfill the obligation of the listeners even though they know how to say the blessing themselves.

2. Who can be Motzi others:[9]
3. 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 than the category of Birchas Hanehnin which follows different, and more stringent, bylaws with regards to the laws of who can be Motzi another.[10] 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 Hamotzi or Hagafen that is said on behalf of this Mitzvah.[11] However, the blessing of Hamotzi over Lechem Mishneh on Shabbos and Yom Tov is considered Birchas Hanehnin and not Birchas Hamitzvos.[12]

1. Birchas Hamitzvos:

Definition of Birchas Hamitzvos: See above in A.

One who is exempt from a Mitzvah:[13] One who is exempt from a Mitzvah, such as a child or woman, cannot be Motzi others.[14] 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 Derabanon versus Trei Derabanon]:[15] 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 bring 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[16] rule that one who is obligated Rabbinically as a Trei Derabanon cannot be Motzi one who is obligated as a Chad Derabanon. However, if both are Rabbinically obligated, even though the Rabbinical level obligation is due to different reasons [i.e. each are Chad Derabanon], then they can be Motzi each other.[17] [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:[18] 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[19]] 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].[20] This applies even to a man who was already Yotzei being Motzi a woman.[21] Nevertheless, regarding the blessing of the Mitzvah [i.e. Asher Kiddishanu, Kiddush, Havdala], 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[22]] may only recite the blessing on behalf of another if that person is unable to recite the blessing himself.[23] If, however, the other person knows how to recite the blessings, then he is to recite it himself rather than hear the blessings from the person who already fulfilled his obligation [or does not plan to currently do so].[24] [All this is Lechatchila, however, Bedieved, if the person doing the Mitzvah for the other also recited the blessings rather than the listener, nevertheless the listener fulfills his obligation of reciting the blessings.[25]]

Minyan: There is no requirement to have a Minyan present in order to be Yotzei a blessing of a Mitzvah with another person.[26] 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.[27]

Q&A What is the definition of not knowing how to recite the blessings?[28] 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.[29] However, some Poskim[30] write it is best to do so, although the person is not to say Hashem’s name.

1. Birchas Hanehnin:[31]

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 Hanhenin 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.[32] 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 Hamiztvos. However, the blessing of Hamotzi over Lechem Mishneh on Shabbos and Yom Tov is considered Birchas Hanehnin and not Birchas Hamitzvos.[33]

Saying an after blessings on behalf of another:[34] 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:[35] 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.[36] 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.[37] 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.[38] 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.[39]

Bedieved if said Birchas Hanehnin on behalf of another:[40] 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.[41] 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:[42] 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 the mitzvah’s. This applies even to someone else’s child. This applies even at times that the child is not eating or drinking, and certainly applies prior to eating or drinking a 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:[43] 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[44], nonetheless, initially the custom is for one to personally recite a blessing over food or drink rather than hear it from another[45], 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[46] rule that one cannot be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another with exception to bread and wine.[47]

Can a child who is eating or drinking be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin? Some Poskim[48] rule that child who is eating or drinking can be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin.[49] However, from Admur[50] it is implied that a child can only be Motzi an adult by the blessing of Birchas Hamazon and not by any other blessing.[51]

1. Woman:

Mitzvos that they are not obligated in – Being Motzi others:[52] Although a woman may choose to recite a blessing prior to performing even mitzvahs that they are exempt from[53], 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 neither 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.[54] 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:[55] 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.[56]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Yotzei from others:[57] 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.[58] 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.[59]

Mitzvos that they are obligated in – Being Motzi others:[60] 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. [61] Nevertheless, it is not proper for a woman to be Motzi a man.[62]

Birchas Hamazon:[63] 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.[64] 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.[65]

1. Child:

Child saying on behalf of an adult – Mitzvah’s:[66] A child cannot be Motzi an adult in a Mitzvah that the adult is obligated, in.[67] 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.[68]

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.[69] Furthermore, even regarding other blessings some Poskim[70] rule that child who is eating or drinking can be Motzi another in Birchas Hanehnin.[71] However, from Admur[72] it is implied that a child can only be Motzi an adult by the blessing of Birchas Hamazon and not by any other blessing.[73]

Saying a blessing on behalf of a child:[74] It is permitted to recite a blessing on behalf of any child in order to educate them in the 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 or drinking a 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.

1. Birchas Hashevach – Morning Blessings:[75]

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 ones 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.[76]

May one fulfill his obligation through hearing Birchas Hatorah said by another person? Yes.[77] However there are Poskim[78] 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.[79] However there are Poskim[80] 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.[81]

3. Minyan – Can one be Yotzei a blessing without a Minyan?[82]

Depends. There is no requirement to have a Minyan present in order to be Yotzei a blessing of Birchas Hamitzvos, or Birchas Hanhenin with another person. However, Birchas Hashevach and the blessings of Davening, one can only be Yotzei if a Minyan is present.

4. What is better-To say the blessing on one’s own or to be Yotzei with another/Chazan?[83]
5. Birchas Hamitzvos:

Mitzvos that are fulfilled individually:[84] Whenever a Minyan of people are fulfilling the same Mitzvah at the same time, and each individual is performing their own Mitzvah, such as each person is wrapping himself in a Tallis or wearing Tefillin [or saying Sefiras Haomer] they can choose to either have one person say the blessing over the Mitzvah on all their behalf and then have each one perform the Mitzvah, or they want they can choose to have each person recite their own blessing. [There is no Halachic precedence for one way over the other, as each method contains an advantageous aspect.] The advantage of fulfilling the blessing through one person is “Berov Am Hadras Melech”, (while the advantage of saying their own individual blessing is to personally say the blessing rather than be Yotzei through a messenger, and thus increase in blessings.[85]) [This advantage however of Berov Am is seemingly only applicable if there is a Minyan present, while if a Minyan is not present, it is better to say the blessing oneself rather than be Yotzei from another.[86] Furthermore, the widespread custom today is for every individual to recite the blessing himself, even if a Minyan is present, and so is the proper directive.[87] This however only applies to Mitzvos that are fulfilled individually, and not to collective Mitzvos.[88]]

Mitzvos that are fulfilled collectively:[89] Whenever a Mitzvah is being fulfilled together, collectively [with the same object], such as everyone is listening to the Shofar being blown, or Megillah being read, by one person, it is a Mitzvah for one person to say the blessing on all their behalf.[90] Either the person blowing the Shofar or reading the Megillah is to say the blessing on everyone’s behalf, or one of the participants who are listening is to say the blessing on everyone’s behalf.[91] The same applies if everyone is sitting in the same Sukkah, [that one person should say the blessing of Leishev Bassukah on everyone’s behalf]. The same applies for Kiddush or Havdala and all cases of the like [that it is best for one person to say Kiddush and Havdala on everyone else’s behalf]. Nonetheless, if every individual desires to fulfill the Mitzvah on their own and say the blessing on their own, they are permitted to do so. For example, if there isn’t a Minyan present and each person will read the Megillah on their own, or each person will blow the Shofar on their own, then it is permitted for each person to say their own blessing. Nonetheless, it is proper for one person to read for everyone else’s behalf in order to fulfill “Berov Am Hadras Melech.” This is not an obligation, although is preferable.[92] [If they choose to perform the Mitzvah on their own, individually, then even if there is a Minyan present, there is no advantage to be Yotzei the blessing from one person rather than say it on their own, as explained in the previous case. If, however, there isn’t a Minyan present then it is preferable to say the blessing on their own rather than hear it from one person.[93]]

Summary: Those Mitzvos that are performed individually, such as Tallis/Tefillin/Sefira, [it is better to say the blessing on one’s own than to hear it from another, unless a Minyan is present in which case] there is no preference whether one says the blessing individually or hears it from the Chazan. However, today it is better in all cases to recite the blessing individually, and so is the custom. However, those Mitzvos that can be performed collectively with the same object, such as a congregation hearing Shofar/Megillah/Kiddush/Havdala and sitting in the same Sukkah, then when the Mitzvah is performed collectively, which is preferable, it is a Mitzvah for the congregation to hear the blessing from one person. This applies even if a Minyan is not present. If however they decide to perform the Mitzvah individually, although this is not preferable, they may do so, and in such a case every person may say their own blessing [or choose to be Yotzei with one person, if a Minyan is present, while if a Minyan is not present, every person is to say the blessing on his own].

1. Birchas Hanehnin:[94]

Letter of law: By Birchas Hanehnin, whenever it is possible for one to fulfill his obligation with another, such as when they are eating or drinking bread or wine together in a state of Kevius, or if they are collectively and simultaneously receiving the pleasure, then it is a Mitzvah for one person to recite the blessing on behalf of them all, as Berov Am Hadras Melech.[95] This is a mere Hiddur Mitzvah and is not an obligation, although one should follow this Hiddur when possible, with exception to if the group initially has in mind to not join each other in which case they are exempt from following this Hiddur.[96]

The custom:[97] Despite the above Hiddur Mitzvah for one to say the blessing on behalf of all, in today’s times the custom has become for each individual to say the blessing to themselves and not fulfill their obligation with others. The reason for this is because people are not careful to speak between hearing the blessing and tasting the food, which invalidates the blessing. Now, since this has become the custom it is considered that they established themselves initially to not join together with a blessing, and are hence exempt from the above Hiddur.

Letter of law by Before blessings:[98] The above letter of law Mitzvah for one person to recite the blessing on behalf of others only applies to the blessing of Hamotzi said over a meal of bread, and Hagafen said over the drinking of wine. However by the before blessings of all other foods, it is better that one say the blessing himself, as some Poskim[99] rule that one cannot be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another with exception to bread and wine.

Letter of law by After blessings:[100] Likewise, the above letter of law Mitzvah for one person to recite the blessing on behalf of others only applies to before blessings, however by after blessings [i.e. Borei Nefashos, Meiyn Gimel] one must say the blessing personally himself with exception to Birchas Hamazon which may even initially be heard from another when in the state of Zimun and Kevius.

How many people together: By the before blessings of Hamotzi and Hagafen, the letter of law Mitzvah for one person to recite the blessing on behalf of others applies even if there are only two people eating together.[101] However, by the after blessing of Birchas Hamazon this only applies if there is a Zimun of three men present.[102]

5. Kevius – The requirement to be sitting together with the person saying the blessing in order to be Yotzei:[103]
6. Birchas Hanehnin:[104]

By all Birchas Hanehnin, one cannot be Yotzei a blessing from another unless the group is Kavua together, which is defined as sitting together at the same table.[105] Thus, if the listener remains standing, he does not fulfill his obligation being that he has excluded himself from the Kevius. Rather, both the listener and the person saying the blessing, must both be seated on the same table. This applies to both a before and after blessing, and applies even Bedieved.[106] This requirement of Kevius applies even to family members, with exception to a waiter for whom Kevius is not required.[107] However, regarding if even Lechatchila one may fulfill his obligation through hearing the blessing from another when in the state of Kevius, there is a difference between the type of blessing being recited, as will be explained.

Bracha Rishona:[108] Even when sitting together in a form of Kevius the custom is for every person to say their own blessing by all foods and drinks other than bread and wine, and not fulfill their obligation with the blessing of others. The reason for this is because some Poskim[109] rule that one cannot be Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin from another with exception to bread and wine.

Bread and Wine:[110] By bread and wine, one may even initially fulfill his obligation with another’s blessing when in a form of Kevius.

Bracha Achrona:[111] Initially, one cannot be Yotzei an after blessing of Birchas Hanehnin [i.e. Borei Nefashos, Meiyn Gimel] from another, with exception to Birchas Hamazon with a Zimun[112], even if they are in a state of Kevius. However, Bedieved, if one heard an after blessing from another, then if they were in a state of Kevius and both had intention to be Yotzei Motzi with the blessing, then it is valid. Furthermore, if someone does not know how to say an after blessing, then he may even initially fulfill his obligation with the after blessing of another if they are in a form of Kevius. For this reason, in today’s times that there are many who belittle the saying of an after blessing, so is to be done even initially that one person say the after blessing out loud in order to fulfill the obligation of the listeners even though they know how to say the blessing themselves.

Birchas Hanhenin that do not involve food [i.e. Besamim]:[113] The above necessity of Kevius and sitting to be Yotzei a blessing only applies by a blessing said over a food or drink which contains personal and individual pleasure and benefit, and not by a blessing over pleasures that is collectively received. Thus, all the listeners fulfill their obligation of the blessing said over spices that reaches everyone’s nose simultaneously whether they are sitting or standing. Thus, it is not necessary to be sitting together by the blessing of Besamim that is recited by Havdalah, and the same applies for the blessing said over the fire, that it does not require Kevius for the listeners to be Yotzei, as these blessings are considered both collective pleasures as well as blessing of mitzvah’s. However when a person is smelling spices individually outside of the Motzei Shabbos obligation, such as he is holding his own spices in his hands, then he does not fulfill his obligation with hearing the blessing from another, unless they are both in the state of Kevius.

1. Birchas Hamitzvos:[114]

The above necessity of Kevius and sitting to be Yotzei a blessing only applies by a blessing said over a food or drink for the sake of benefit and pleasure, and not by a blessing that is said over a Mitzvah for the sake of being Motzi others. Thus, all the listeners fulfill their obligation whether they are sitting or standing or walking around, and even if they are in different rooms or homes, so long as they hear the blessing and have in the mind to be Yotzi Motzi.

Initially should one sit or stand: Some Poskim[115] rule that one is specifically to stand when being Yotzei a blessing of a Mitzvah, and so is the custom by Shofar and Megillah. However, other Poskim[116] rule that it is not necessary for the listeners to stand for the recital of the blessing and so is the custom of certain communities.

Kiddush:[117] The entire Nussach of Kiddush of both night and day is considered like Birchas Hamitzvos and not like Birchas Hanehnin, and hence the listeners fulfill the obligation without needing Kevius, whether they are sitting, standing, or walking, or even in a room next door, and may drink wine after hearing the recital of kiddush without repeating the blessing of Hagafen.

Havdala:[118] According to Ashkenazim, the entire Nussach of Havdala is considered like Birchas Hamitzvos and not like Birchas Hanehnin, and hence the listeners fulfill the obligation without needing Kevius, whether they are sitting, standing, or walking, or even in a room next door, and may drink wine after hearing the recital of Havdalah without repeating the blessing of Hagafen. This applies whether everyone is standing, or everyone is sitting, or the listeners are sitting while the person who is saying it is standing, or the person saying it is sitting and the listeners are standing. However, Sephardim are to sit while reciting Havdala and while it is being heard from another. However, those who follow the Ashkenazi custom of standing for Havdala, may do so even if the person saying Havdala is Sephardi and is accustomed to sit, as according to his custom, he may fulfill his obligation even without Kevius.

Besamim and Haeish by Havdala:[119] The blessing of Besamim said over spices, and the blessing of Haeish said over fire on Motzei Shabbos do not require Kevius for the listeners to be Yotzei, as these blessings are considered blessing of mitzvah’s as well as collective pleasures. This applies even if the above blessings are being said outside of Havdalah, such as that one did not have wine or fire available when Havdala was said over a cup of wine. This applies even if they are not smelling the spices simultaneously and are rather smelling it one after the other.

Hamotzi on Lechem Mishneh:[120] The blessing of Hamotzi over Lechem Mishneh on Shabbos and Yom Tov is considered Birchas Hanehnin and not Birchas Hamitzvos, and hence one does not fulfill his obligation unless the blessing was recited in a way of Kevius.[121]

Sitting when being Yotzei a Sephardic Havdalah

1. Question: [Thursday, 6th Nissan, 5782]

I was present by a Sephardic Havdala on Motzei Shabbos and was told that I need to sit in order to be Yotzei Havdalah. I responded to the individual that we are accustomed for the listeners to stand for Havdala and he said that this only applies if the person making Havdala will be saying it while standing, however according to Sephardic custom in which it is said sitting, then also the people listening to it must sit.

 

Answer:

This is inaccurate. It is not necessary for you to sit during Havdala even if the person saying does so in a sitting position. Even in such a case, you are Yotzei Havdalah even if you hear it while standing.

Explanation: There is a dispute amongst the Rishonim and Poskim regarding whether Havdala should be said in a standing or sitting position. The Michaber rules that is to be said in a sitting position in order to achieve Kevius while the Rama rules that it is to be said in a standing position out of respect for the King, and so is also the ruling of Admur in various areas of his Shulchan Aruch, that Havdala is to be said while standing. The general practice of Ashkenazi Jewry is like the position of the Rama, to stand while reciting Havdala, while the general practice of Sephardic Jewry is like the Michaber, to sit while reciting Havdala. There are however some exceptions, as stated in the Aruch Hashulchan that there were some Gedolei Yisrael [of Ashkenaz] who would recite it while sitting, and so is the ruling of the Gr”a. There are also some exceptions on the Sephardic side, as the Ben Ish Chaiy rules that have Havdala is to be said while standing. Whatever the case, each community is to follow the custom. Now let us tackle the issue that was raised above, as to what one is to do when hearing Havdala from a person who says it in a sitting position; may he remain standing as is his general custom, or in such a case we say that he must sit? The argument which would require him to sit in such a case is that the entire concept of sitting by Havdala is so it be in a form of Kevius, as one cannot be Yotzei a blessing from another unless the group is Kavua together, which is defined as sitting together. Thus, if the listener remains standing, he does not fulfill his obligation being that he has excluded himself from the Kevius. In truth however, those who are accustomed to stand during Havdala argue on this entire premises and rule that Kevius is only required by blessing said over a food for the sake of benefit and pleasure, and not when it is said over a mitzvah for the sake of being Motzi others. Hence, those who follow the Ashkenazi custom of standing for Havdala, may do so even if the person saying Havdala is Sephardi and is accustomed to sit, as according to his custom, he may fulfill his obligation even without Kevius. Accordingly, the above information that was told to the individual that since the person saying it is sitting he must also sit in order to fulfill his obligation, is not accurate.

 

Sources: Poskim who hold that it is to be said in a standing position: Admur 296:15; 473:9; Rama 296:6 based on the Igur and Agguda; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeitzei 21; See Admur 213:5; 298:20; Poskim who hold that it is to be said in a sitting position: Michaber 296:6; Kaf Hachaim 296:39-41; Yechaveh Daas 4:26; This ruling is based on Tosafus and Moredchaiy which rule one is to sit in order so the blessing over the wine have a Kevius. [Kaf Hachaim 296:39-41; M”B 296:27]  Gra in Shulchan Aruch ibid and in Maaseh Rav 150; Aruch Hashulchan 296:17 writes there are Gedolei Yisrael which recite it sitting. Kaf Hachaim [Falagi] 31:38 rules that based on kabala one is to sit while saying Havdalah. See regarding the general necessity of sitting for the sake of Kevius when being Yotzei a blessing from another over a food: Admur 213:1; Michaber 213:1; Tur 174; Rashi Brachos 43a; Tosafus Chulin 106b; See regarding that by a Mitzvah, such as Havdalah, Kevius is not necessary to be Yotzei: Admur 213:1 regarding Kiddush and Havdala; 213:5 regarding Haeish and Besamim; M”A 213:1; 273:13; Alef Lamagen 625:74; Kaf Hachaim 213:3

 

 

6. If one did not hear some of the words in a blessing, is he Yotzei?[122]

One does not fulfill his obligation with any blessing, even if he answers Amen[123], unless he hears the [entire[124]] blessing from the beginning until the end. [Thus, if one did not hear the word Baruch in the beginning of the blessing, he does not fulfill his obligation.[125] Furthermore, the above ruling implies that one must hear every single word of the blessing, and if one missed even one word from anywhere in the blessing, it is invalid. However, in truth, the Poskim[126] clarify that this applies only to those words that are considered the main dialect of the blessing, as established by the Sages, in which case, if one did not hear one of those words, he does not fulfill his obligation. However, if one did not hear a word, or words, that are not part of the main dialect of the blessing, then he fulfills his obligation, just as is the law regarding if one said the blessing himself, and skipped those words. In the following we will now discuss which words are considered part of the main dialect, and which are not:]

A short blessing: By all short, one sentence blessings, the following words are considered part of the main dialect, and if the word was skipped, or not heard, one does not fulfill his obligation: The word “Baruch[127]”; Hashem’s name[128]; Melech[129]; Haolam[130], and the conclusion which mentions that which one is blessing Hashem for.[131] Some Poskim[132] rule that the word “Ata” is not considered part of the main dialect, and if one did not hear it, he fulfills his obligation. Other Poskim[133] however rule that every single word of a short blessing is considered part of the main dialect, and if one missed even one word, he does not fulfill his obligation. [Based on the above, if one did not hear Hashem’s name, or the word Baruch, or the Melech Haolam, in the blessing of Hagafen, or Hamotzi, or in the concluding blessing of Hamavdil Bein Kodesh Lechol, or in the concluding blessing of Mikadeish Hashabbos of Kiddush, he does not fulfill his obligation, and must repeat the blessing. Regarding the other words, it is questionable whether one fulfills his obligation[134], and in all cases of doubt, Safek Brachos Lihakel, although one is to escape the question by hearing the blessing again from another person.]

A long blessing: A blessing which contains an opening and concluding blessing, such as Havdala, Kiddush, Asher Yatzar and the like, if one did not hear all the words in the short concluding blessing, or in the very beginning of the long blessing[135], then this follows the same law as stated above. If, however, he missed a middle word, or section, in the long opening blessing, then whether he fulfills his obligation depends on if the missed word is part of the main dialect of the blessing [Ikkur Tofes Habrach], or not.[136] In many cases, it is unclear as to which words are part of the main dialect, and which are not, and in all cases of doubt, one is to try and hear the blessing again from another person, in order to fulfill his obligation according to all.

Havdalah – Missed some words: The lack of the blessing of Hagafen does not invalidate the fulfillment of Havdalah, and thus one who walked late into Havdalah and missed the blessing of Hagafen, nevertheless fulfills his obligation so long as he heard the blessing of Hamavdil.[137] However, one does not fulfill his obligation unless he hears the entire[138] blessing [of Hamavdil] from beginning to end.[139]  

Summary: In order to be Yotzei a blessing from another person, one must hear him say the entire blessing from beginning to end. If one missed a word that is part of the main dialect of the blessing, he does not fulfill his obligation, and possibly, by a short one sentence blessing, every word is part of the main dialect and he does not fulfill his obligation if he missed even one word. However, by long blessings, there are words that are not part of the main dialect of the blessing, and if one missed one of those words, he fulfills his obligation. In many cases, it is unclear as to which words are part of the main dialect, and which are not, and in all cases of doubt, one is to try and hear the blessing again from another person, in order to fulfill his obligation according to all.

7. Kavana – Intention to be Yotzei and Motzi:[140]

One who desires to fulfill his obligation with the blessing of another, must have intention to fulfill his obligation with the blessing that he hears, and likewise the person who says the blessing must have intention to be Motzi him with his blessing.

Bedieved if did not have Kavana: Some Poskim[141] rule that one does not fulfill his obligation with hearing a blessing, even if he answers Amen[142], unless he has intention to fulfill his obligation with the blessing that he hears, and the person who says the blessing has intention to be Motzi him with his blessing.[143] Other Poskim[144], however, rule that one fulfill his obligation of the blessing, whether a before blessing or after blessing, even if the person saying the blessing did not have in mind to be Motzi him and also he did not have intent to be Yotzei the blessing.[145] Practically, one should suspect for both opinions[146] [and hence in the event that there wasn’t intention, then he should try to re-hear the blessing from another person in order to suspect for the former opinion, although should not repeat the blessing himself in order to suspect for the latter opinion[147]].

Overhearing someone reciting a blessing:[148] If one overheard someone saying a blessing, then he should suspect for the opinion brought above who rules that he fulfill his obligation even if he did not have any intention to do so.[149] [Accordingly, in such a case, he should not repeat the blessing himself in order to suspect for the latter opinion[150] and should rather try to re-hear the blessing from another person in order to suspect for the former opinion.] Thus, for example, if someone took a fruit in his hand in order to eat it or took an item in his hand in order to perform a mitzvah with and prior to having a chance to recite the blessing, he overheard the blessing from someone else who was saying the blessing for himself, then according to the latter opinion he is not required to repeat the blessing [and hence should not repeat it in order to suspect for the latter opinion]. However, initially one should be very careful in this matter and avoid entering into a questionable blessing. [This can be avoided through having specific intent to not fulfill his obligation as explained below, or through speaking in middle of his blessing, as explained in Chapter ?? Halacha ??.]

Reciting blessings quietly:[151] Due to the above conclusion of Admur that one should avoid entering into a questionable blessing, the widespread Chabad custom is to recite blessings quietly in order so the people don’t overhear it.[152] [This custom however only applies to private blessings, such as over a food or a personal Mitzvah, and only when other people may also desire to eat or perform the Mitzvah, and hence they will be saying their own blessing. If however the blessing will not be said by others, and certainly if the blessing is said on behalf of the public such as Birchas Hatorah by an Aliyah, then it is to be said aloud. Likewise, in instances that saying the blessings aloud helps educate the listeners in saying the blessing, then it should be said aloud.]

If had Kavana to not be Yotzei:[153] The above dispute only applies in a case that the individual who heard a blessing did not have explicit intent neither to fulfill or to not fulfill his obligation with the blessing. However, if he had explicit intent to not fulfill his obligation with the blessing, then according to all opinions, he doesn’t fulfill his obligation.[154] [Accordingly, one who desires to avoid entering into a questionable Safek Bracha upon overhearing blessing should always have in mind to not fulfill his obligation upon overhearing it.] This however only applies if he specifically had in mind to not fulfill his obligation with the overhearing of the blessing. If however he did not have in mind to not fulfill his obligation, but rather had in mind that he is not intending to fulfill his obligation[155], then he falls under the same dispute stated above, and is hence not repeat the blessing.[156]

           

Summary: If one casually overheard the counting of another person, he is to repeat the Sefira without a blessing unless one specifically had in mind to not fulfill his obligation with the overhearing of the Sefira, then he is to repeat the Sefira with a blessing. Accordingly, whenever one overhears the blessing/Sefira from another he is to have in mind to not be Yotzei with the blessing/Sefira.    If one overheard the counting from a child or woman, may he still count with a blessing? An adult male [i.e. over Bar Mitzvah] who overheard a woman or child say the blessing/Sefira does not fulfill his obligation according to any opinion and is thus to repeat the Sefira with a blessing.[157]   Having in mind one time for the rest of one’s life:[158] A good advice to avoid entering into the above Halachic issue is to have in mind that from now and onwards one intends to not be Yotzei with anyone’s blessing, unless he decides otherwise [such as if he needs to hear the blessing from another due to Safek, or by a Mitzvah that is done collectively, such as Kiddush, Shofar, Megillah etc]. This intent can be effective forever and prevents one from needing to have this mind every particular time he overhears a blessing.

8. Answering Amen:

Initially it is an absolute obligation for one to answer Amen to a blessing that he hears, even if he does not have intent to fulfill his obligation with that blessing as explained in length in Chapter ?? Halacha ??, and certainly if he does.

Bedieved if did not answer Amen:[159] Bedieved, if one listened to a blessing with intent to be Yotzei but did not answer Amen he nevertheless fulfills his obligation.

9. Not to answer Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo:[160]

Whenever a person has in mind to fulfill his obligation with a blessing, then he is not to say Baruch Hu Uvarach Shemo upon hearing Hashem’s name said in the blessing.[161]

Bedieved if said Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo: In the event one said Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo it is possible that one has not fulfilled his obligation of the blessing.[162] For this reason it is imperative to warn the public of this matter, as many are unaware of this.

[1] See Admur 8:11; 59:4; 128:17; 167:23; 186:1; 193:1; 197:6; 213:1-6; 273:6; 296:17; 297:7-9; 298:14; 484:1 and 3; 489:1; 585:5; 619:8; Michaber 692:3; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Brachos Vol. 4 p. 309, 344-350

[2] See Admur 213:3 and 6; M”A 213:7

[3] Admur 8:11; 167:23; 197:6; M”A 167:40; Rashi Shavuos 39a; Tosafos Brachos 48b; Rosh Brachos 7:21; Rabbienu Yona Brachos 20a; Sanhedrin 27b

[4] Admur 213:1

[5] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:1; Rama 213:1; Raavad Brachos 1:12; Brachos 43a

[6] See Admur 213:1

[7] Admur 213:2; Rashba 1:205; Ramban 196; See M”A 167:28; Admur 167:17

[8] See Admur 213:1

[9] 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

[10] Admur 167:23

[11] Admur 167:23; 273:6; 484:1;

[12] 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]

[13] 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;

[14] 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]

[15] 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

[16] 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 Ohalei 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 Derabanon can be Motzi a Chad Derabanon. [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 Ohalei 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 Derabanon: All Poskim ibid; Admur ibid that with exception to Birchas Hamazon, he cannot be Motzi adult even if adult is Chad Derabanon as well.

[17] 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 Daavened 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

[18] 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 Ohalei Torah 1024 p. 56; 1025 p. 65; 1026 p. 74; 1028 p. 79; So rule regarding Havdala: 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.

[19] See Admur 273:6

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

[21] 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 Barchos 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 Tzlach 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

[22] 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.

[23] 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]

[24] 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.]  

[25] Admur 273:6; Terumos Hadeshen 140

[26] 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.

[27] 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.

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

[29] 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!

[30] Kaf Hachaim 8:21

[31] 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

[32] 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 persons 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]

[33] 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]

[34] 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]

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

[36] 1^st opinion in Admur 197:3

[37] Admur 186:3

[38] 2^nd opinion in Admur 197:3 and final ruling

[39] Admur 186:4

[40] Admur 213:3

[41] 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]

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

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

[44] 1^st and main opinion Admur ibid

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

[46] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:1; Rama 213:1; Raavad Brachos 1:12; Brachos 43a

[47] See Admur 213:1

[48] P”M 213 A”A 7; 215 M”Z 3  

[49] 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 Derabanon can be Motzi a Chad Derabanon. [See M”A 186:3 based on Pesachim 116b; Opinion in Admur 197:6 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Koveitz Ohalei 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]

[50] 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 Ohalei Torah 808 pp. 44-49

[51] The reason: As a Trei Derabanon cannot be Motzi a Chad Derabanon. [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]

[52] 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;

[53] 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-Sefaradim: 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 Tzevi] The Michaber ibid rules that they cannot say a blessing as Safek Brachos Lihakel. [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.

[54] 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; Havdala: 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 Havdala; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[55] See Admur 296:19 [Havdala]; 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 Havdala; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:21

[56] 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. 

[57] 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 Tzlach 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

[58] 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 Barchos 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 Tzlach 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]

[59] 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 Ohalei Torah 1024 p. 56; 1025 p. 65; 1026 p. 74; 1028 p. 79; So rule regarding Havdala: 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

[60] 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

[61] 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 Barchos 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 Tzlach 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

[62] 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 99-100See 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”

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

[64] Admur 186:3

[65] Admur 186:4

[66] 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;

[67] 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]

[68] 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

[69] Admur 186:3

[70] P”M 213 A”A 7; 215 M”Z 3  

[71] 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 Derabanon can be Motzi a Chad Derabanon. [See M”A 186:3 based on Pesachim 116b; Opinion in Admur 197:6 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Koveitz Ohalei 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]

[72] 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 Ohalei Torah 808 pp. 44-49

[73] The reason: As a Trei Derabanon cannot be Motzi a Chad Derabanon. [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]

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

^[75] 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.

[76] 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 Elokaiy Neshama: The Ketzos Hashulchan ibid writes that according to Admur one does not fulfill his obligation through hearing Elokaiy 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 Elokaiy 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!

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

[78] 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.]

[79] 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.

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

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

[82] 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.

[83] Admur 213:6

[84] Admur 213:6; One interpretation of Tosefta Brachos 6:20; Or Zarua R”H 262; Mahram Merothnberg 7; Abudarham Seder Tefilos Shel Chol 3; So rule regarding Tzitzits: Admur 8:11; Michaber 8:5; Orchos Chaim Tzitzis 25; See M”A 213:7

Other rulings of Admur: Tzaruch Iyun from Admur 619:8 who states regarding the blessing of Shehechiyanu of Yom Kippur [and extends this as well towards Hallel and Birchas Lulav] that it is proper to be Yotzei with the Chazan due to Berov Am. Vetzaruch Iyun as to how this does not contradict the ruling of Admur 213:6 which states that by Mitzvos fulfilled individually [such as Lulav, and Hallel, Vetzaruch Iyun as to the definition of Birchas Shehechiyanu] one can choose whether to say it himself or be Yotzei with the Chazan, and there is no advantage either way. [See Hearos Ubiurim Ohalei Torah 805:72 who asks this question and suggests that Shehechiyanu is considered a collective Mitzvah, while the extension of Hallel and Birchas Lulav was never intended to be going on the beginning of this Halacha but rather on the second part that the congregation should finish before the Chazan. However see M”A 619:3 who does not learn this way]

Other opinions: Some Poskim record it is always a Mitzvah, in all cases for a group to prefer the fulfillment of a blessing through one person rather than through saying it individually, due to Berov Am. There is no difference mentioned as to the type of Mitzvos, or amount of people in the group. [M”B 213:3 and 17, based on Madneiy Yom Tov and Ramach; Implication of M”A 213:7 and M”A 619:3] Even by a Mitzvah that is performed individually, such as Tzitzis, it is preferable for a group to be Yotzei with one person due to Berov Am. [Implication of M”A 619:3 in name of Shelah regarding Hallel and Birchas Lulav and so can be implied from Admur 619:8; M”B 8:13 regarding Tzitzis, based on 298:14 regarding Havdalah, however Admur ibid explains that Havdala is a case of a collective Mitzvah and hence contains only the preference of Berov Am, while the Mitzvah of Tzitzis is an individual Mitzvah, and hence contains an advantage in saying the blessing personally.]

[85] Admur ibid in parentheses

The reason: (One is to always increase in necessary blessings, [and thus saying the blessing individually contains an advantage over being Yotzei with another, as it decreases in blessings]. Now, although one who hears is like one who answers [and thus there is no decrees in blessings] nevertheless, the one who blesses is the main blessing [i.e. the only blessing said], as he becomes an emissary for everyone to fulfill their obligation, and everyone fulfills the Mitzvah of the blessing through him. It is as if everyone is reciting a single blessing which is being expressed through the mouth of the person saying the blessing, as his mouth is like their mouth. Now, it is better for each individual to personally fulfill the Mitzvah of the blessing, rather than fulfill it through a messenger, as since every person is obligated in this blessing, this is considered an increase of necessary blessings, and is not similar at all to Chazaras Hashtaz, and Birchas Hazimun, as explained in 192:1, [as Chazaras Hashatz and Zimun is a collective Mitzvah on the congregation, and not an individual Mitzvah.]) [Admur ibid in parentheses]

[86] 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; Implication of Admur 489:1 who records this Tosefta:M”A and writes “As when there are ten Jews doing a Mitzvah together one Jew is Yachol:allowed to say the blessing on behalf of all the congregants, as explained in 8:11.” This implies that whenever there is less than a Minyan, then one is not initially to be Yotzei with another, as there is no advantage of Berov Am, and he loses the advantage of Mitzvah Bo Yoser Mibishlucho, and of increasing in necessary blessing; 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. [So learns M”B 8:13 in his initial inference] However, Tzaruch Iyun from the continuation of Admur 213:6 regarding the case that the Mitzvah can be performed collectively, who implies that even when a Minyan is not present it is better for them to perform the Mitzvah and blessing as a group, due to Berov Am, rather than as individuals. [Perhaps however there is a difference between that case where they are able to perform the Mitzvah collectively, and this case in which it is not possible, and hence only in this case does the individual blessing have the advantage of increasing in blessings, which overrides the advantage of Berov Am without a Minyan, while in the case there is no advantage of doing it individually, and it hence does not override the Berov Am of even less than a Minyan. In other words, the Mitzvah to increase in blessings is only when it is an individualized Mitzvah that cannot be performed collectively, or one is practically not doing so collectively for whatever reason. However, Tzaruch Iyun to create two levels of Berov Am, one without a Minyan and one with a Minyan; the latter being equal to the advantage of increasing in required blesisngs and the former being overriden by this Mitzvah.] Likewise, Tzaruch Iyun from the fact that in this very case here Admur does not stipulate that the advantage of choosing to be Yotzei with another’s blessing is only if there is a Minyan present, and if there isn’t a Minyan present then he is to say the blessing himself due to the Mitzvah to increase in blessings, and neither does he stipulate this explicitly in 8:11. See also coming footnotes. Perhaps then one can say that Admur in Hilchos Pesach 489:1 wrote according to the approach that Berov Am applies only with a Minyan while in Hilchos Tzitzis:Brachos [which he wrote later on] he decided like the approach that Berov Am applies by even less than a Minyan, and if so the final ruling follows the later codified law here in 213:6. Vetzaruch Iyun to create a contradiction in Admur if it is not inevitable, and thus the best thing according to all approaches, is simply to say the blessing oneself.

For different opinions on the definition of Berov Am-see: Ramach, brought in Kesef Mishneh Brachos 1:12, that less than three is not Berov Am;  Biur Halacha 426:2  “Ela” in name of Chayeh Adsam 68:11 [three people is Berov Am]; Har Tzevi 1:19 [ten people as states Tosefta ibid]; See Sefer Nefesh Chayah 167:11; Piskeiy Teshuvos 213:2

[87] Admur 619:8 regarding Shehechiyanu, Birchas Hallel and Lulav “Although it is proper to be Yotzei with the Chazan due to Berov Am, nevertheless today …. every person should recite the blessing himself”; M”A 619:3; Chayeh Adam 5:17; M”B 8:13 that so is custom; Piskeiy Teshuvos 213:2

The reason: As in majority of instances the Chazan does not have in mind to be Motzi the congregation. Admur ibid; Chayeh Adam ibid; M”B ibid]

[88] See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 9

The reason: As by collective Mitzvos, the same way the Chazan is certainly intending to fulfill the obligation of the congregation in his reading of Megillah or blowing Shofar, the same applies to the blessings that he recites.

[89] Admur 213:6; M”A 213:7; Mabit 1:180 in interpretation of Tosefta ibid; Admur 298:20 and Michaber 298:13 regarding Havdala candle; M”A 298:18

[90] The reason: As when a group fulfills a Mitzvah together they are considered like one entity/body and it suffices for them to recite one blessing. Accordingly, if every individual says their own blessing it is not considered a required blessing at all, as their Mitzvah is considered like the Mitzvah of a single entity, and there is not so much of an advantage of increasing in blessings. Now, although saying individual blessings in such a case is not prohibited due to a blessing in vain [Bracha Sheiyno Tzericha], being that every individual is obligated in this blessing, and even now through hearing it it is as if they are saying it [and therefore are Yotzei], nevertheless, since there is no advantage in the increased amount of blessings, therefore one person is to say the blessing on everyone’s behalf to fulfill the advantage of Berov Am. [Admur ibid regarding Birchas Hanehnin, and he applies the same rule to Birchas Hamitzvos of a collective Mitzvah]

[91] Admur ibid; Implication of Taz 585 brought in Shaareiy Tziyon 585:24; M”B 589:4 in name of Achronim

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that initially the person who is blowing is always to say the blessing if he is currently also fulfilling his obligation. [Kaf Hachaim 589:12 and 585:38; Yoreh Deah P”M 1 M”Z 17; Piskeiy Teshuvos 585:9]

[92] The reason: One cannot obligate someone to fulfill a Mitzvah that is commanded upon him through an emissary, if he is able to fulfill it on his own. [Admur ibid] Vetzaruch Iyun why it is even preferable to fulfill the Mitzvah collectively, if we rule that Mitzvah Bo Yoser Mibishlucho, and seemingly one should be able to choose, without preference, which advantage he desires, just as we ruled in the previous case. However, in truth, the rule of Mitzvah Bo Yoser Mibeeshluchos does not apply in this case, as everyone is fulfilling the Mitzvah himself, as Shomeia Keoneh, it is just that they are doing so through the same object and voice, and hence there is no advantage of Mitzva Bo even if they say the Megillah:Kiddush themselves. Accordingly, one should prefer doing the Mitzvah collectively, even if a Minyan is not present. Now, once a Mitzvah is done collectively, it is a Mitzvah for one person to say the blessing on behalf of all, as Berov Am Hadras Melech, and there is no Mitzvah to increase in blessings, being they are considered like one entity, as stated in previous footnote.

[93] Whenever the group decides to perform the Mitzvah individually it has the same status as the previous case, of which we ruled that if a Minyan is present there is no preference to what they choose, as either option contains an advantage, while if a Minyan is not present then they should prefer to say the blessing individually. The only difference is that in this case we tell them initially to perform the Mitzvah collectively, and consequently have a Mitzvah to hear the blessing from one person, even if it is less than a Minyan. However, if they decide not to, then the same laws as the previous case becomes applicable.

[94] See Admur 167:14 and 18; 213:6

[95] Admur 167:14 and 18; 213:6

The reason: As being Yotzei Birchas Hanehnin with another requires Kevius, and they are therefore considered like one body receiving pleasure and it hence suffices for one person to say the blessing on behalf of them all. Accordingly, if every individual says their own blessing it is not considered a required blessing at all, as their pleasure is considered like the pleasure of a single entity as a result of their Kevius together unless they initially sat together with intent to not join for a single blessing. However, when they do sit in a way of Kevius then they become one body and there is not so much of an advantage of increasing in blessings. Now, although saying individual blessings in such a case is not prohibited due to a blessing in vain [Bracha Sheiyno Tzericha], being that every individual is obligated in this blessing, and even now through hearing it it is as if they are saying it [and therefore are Yotzei], nevertheless, since there is no advantage in the increased amount of blessings, therefore one person is to say the blessing on everyone’s behalf to fulfill the advantage of Berov Am. [Admur ibid]

[96] Admur 167:18; 213:6

[97] Admur 167:18

[98] See Admur 213:1

[99] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:1; Rama 213:1; Raavad Brachos 1:12; Brachos 43a

[100] Admur 213:2; Rashba 1:205; Ramban 196; See M”A 167:28; Admur 167:17

[101] Admur 167:14

[102] Admur 167:14 and 17

Bedieved: Bedieved, one is Yotzei with another’s Birchas Hamazon even if there isn’t a Zimun present, if they are Bekevius. [Admur 167:17; 193:1]

[103] See Admur 167:15-17; 213:1-2 and 5; 273:6, 10; 167:23; Michaber 213:1; Tur 174; Rashi Brachos 43a; Tosafus Chulin 106b; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Brachos Vol. 4 p. 344-350

[104] See Admur 167:15-17; 193:1-2; 213:1

[105] The reason: As when one receives benefit from an item, it is proper for him to say the blessing himself and not fulfill with somebody else unless they are established together. [Admur 167:17]

Leaning versus sitting: In previous times, wine and bread required actual leaning by non-household members to be considered Kevius and sitting alone did not suffice. However, in today’s home when leaning is no longer common by meals, there is no difference between bread and wine and other foods and beverages, and neither of them require leaning, although all of them require sitting as opposed to standing. [Admur 167:15; 213:1]

During travel, field, camel, ship, car: The requirement to sit together on a table in order to be considered Kevius only applies when eating in a home together, however, when eating together during travel in the field then sitting on a table is not required for Kevius, and simply stopping to eat together in the same area suffices. This applies whether they remain standing or sitting on their animals of travel which have stopped traveling, so long as they have designated a set area for their eating. However, while they are still walking and traveling it is not considered Kevius. However, on a ship it suffices to simply decide to eat together in one area for it to be considered Kevius even if they do not eat on the same table and the ship is continuing to travel. Regarding people inside of a car, bus, or train, or plain, while it is traveling it is questionable whether it is considered Kevius when they are each sitting in their seat. However, if the transportation has stopped traveling, then it is considered Kevius. Even in the field, if each person is eating in a different area, then it is not considered Kevius. [Admur 167:16]

[106] 1^st and Stam and main opinion in Admur 167:17; 213:1-2; Michaber 167:13; M”A 167:28; Rosh Brachos 6:33; Rabbeinu Yerucham Nesiv 16

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that Bedieved one fulfills the blessing even without Kevius. [2^nd opinion in Admur 167:17; Implication of Admur 167:3; Michaber ibid; Rokeiach 329; Taz 167:13] Practically, the main ruling follows the stringent opinion. [Admur 167:17]

[107] Admur 167:15

[108] Admur 213:1; Implication of Admur 167:17

[109] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:1; Rama 213:1; Raavad Brachos 1:12; Brachos 43a

[110] Admur 167:17; 213:1

[111] Admur 213:2; 167:17 [regarding Bracha Achrona on fruits!]; Rashba 1:205; Ramban 196; See M”A 167:28

[112] Bedieved: Bedieved, one is Yotzei with another’s Birchas Hamazon even if there isn’t a Zimun present, if they ar Bekevius. [Admur 167:17; 193:1]

[113] Admur 213:5 and 6

[114] Admur 167:17; 213:1 regarding Kiddush and Havdala; 213:5 regarding Haeish and Besamim; 167:23 and 273:10 regarding Kiddush being Birchas Hamitzvos for other matters as well; M”A 213:1; 273:13; Alef Lamagen 625:74; Kaf Hachaim 213:3

[115] Kaf Hachaim 585:1; Machatzis Hashekel on M”A 690:1 regarding Megillah; Beis Oved 690:9 brought in Kaf Hachaim 690:2; Shaar HaTziyon 690:1; Vetzaruch Iyun as to the opinion of Admur in all this, as in 585:2 Admur rules that the people fulfilling the Mitzvah of Tekiah do not have to stand, despite the fact that the person blowing the Shofar has to stand. No mention is made that they have to stand while reciting the blessing. Vetzaruch Iyun.

[116] Ben Ish Chaiy Netzavim 15 brought in kaf Hachaim 585:1; See also Yifei Laleiv 2:2; Kaf Hachaim 690:2 that so was custom of the Beis Keil shul in Jerusalem; Mikraeiy Kodesh brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 690:1

[117] Admur 167:17 and 213:1 [regarding Kevius]; 167:23 and 273:6 and 484:1 regarding being Motzi others

[118] Poskim who hold that it is to be said in a standing position: Admur 296:15; 473:9; Rama 296:6 based on the Igur and Agguda; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeitzei 21; See Admur 213:5; 298:20

Poskim who hold that it is to be said in a sitting position: Michaber 296:6; Kaf Hachaim 296:39-41; Yechaveh Daas 4:26; This ruling is based on Tosafus and Moredchaiy which rule one is to sit in order so the blessing over the wine have a Kevius. [Kaf Hachaim 296:39-41; M”B 296:27]  Gra in Shulchan Aruch ibid and in Maaseh Rav 150; Aruch Hashulchan 296:17 writes there are Gedolei Yisrael which recite it sitting. Kaf Hachaim [Falagi] 31:38 rules that based on kabala one is to sit while saying Havdalah.

[119] Admur 213:5

[120] Admur 167:23; 273:6

[121] 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]

[122] Admur 213:4 “One does not fulfill his obligation with hearing a blessing, even if he answers Amen , unless he hears the from beginning until the end”; Michaber 213:3; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Teshuvas Harambam Pear Hador 101; Brachos 53b; Yerushalmi Brachos 8:5; Megillah 1:9; Sefer Hamichtam and Hashlama ibid; Ravya 153 and 159; Peri Chadash 124; P”M 124 M”Z 4; See also Admur 59:4 regarding having Kavana when hearing Shema; 124:2 and 14 regarding hearing Shemone Esrei that must hear from beginning to end; 183:10 and 193:1 regarding listening to every word of Birchas Hamazon.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the blessing. [Beis Yosef 124 in opinion of Rashi and Tosafus, which is the 2^nd opinion in Admur 124:11; See however Peri Chadash ibid and Mamar Mordechai 124:11] Other Poskim rule that by a Chazan with a Minyan, one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the entire blessing but only its end. [Raavad brought in Michtam and Rashbatz and Meiri Brachos 47a]

[123] However, initially, he may not answer Amen if he needs to be Yotzei this blessing, but cannot due to not hearing it properly. [Admur 124:11; M”A 124:13; Bach 124]

[124] Tur 215:1 “However, if he ate, he is not Yotzei until he hears the entire blessing”; Bach 213 “The entire blessing from beginning until the end”; Beis Yosef 213 “He does not fulfill his obligation until he hears the entire blessing from beginning until the end”

[125] Implication of all Poskim ibid; M”B 213:19 “This includes also the word Baruch”

[126] Shaar Hatziyon 213:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1; Biur Halacha 59:4 “Im Hashliach Tzibur” says this applies by the long blessings; See Admur 124:14 “Since he may not hear from the Chazan some words that invalidate the prayer”; 184:10 “Perhaps he will not hear an invalidating word.”

[127] Implication of all Poskim ibid; M”B 213:19 “This includes also the word Baruch”

[128] Admur 214:1; Michaber 214:1; Kaf Hachaim 214:3; See M”B 214:4 that this only applies if one skipped, or did not hear any of Hashem’s names. If, however, one heard one of the names, such as Adono-y, or Elohei-nu, then he fulfills his obligation; See Admur 167:13; Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1

[129] Admur 214:1; Michaber 214:1; Levush 214; Chayeh Adam 5:3; Chesed Lealafim 214:1; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 2; Sdei Chemed Brachos 1:37; Kaf Hachaim 214:3 based on Arizal in Shaar Hakavanos p. 3, and Peri Eitz Chaim Brachos 2;

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the word Melech does not invalidate the blessing if it is omitted or not heard. [Halachos Ketanos 1:268]

[130] Admur 214:2; Michaber 214:1; Levush 214; Beis Yosef in name of Tosefos; Chayeh Adam 5:3; Chesed Lealafim 214:1; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 2; Biur Halacha 214:1 “Veafilu”; Kaf Hachaim 214:3 based on Arizal in Shaar Hakavanos p. 3, and Peri Eitz Chaim Brachos 2; Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the word Haolam possibly does not invalidate the blessing if it is omitted or not heard. [Even Haozer, brought in Biur Halacha ibid; Halachos Ketanos 1:268]

[131] Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1; See however Admur 167:13 that if one said Brich Rachamana and did not conclude with the word Pita, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation since he said “Dehaiy” and it was sitting before him; See M”B 167:53 regaridng several words skipped; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1 footnote 10 regarding if one skipped “Asher Kidishanu Bemitzvosav Vetzivanu”

[132] M”B 214:4; Divrei Chamudos; Implication of Admur 214:2 who omits the word Ata from the main dialect of the Sages; Piskeiy Teshuvos 214:1

[133] Kaf Hachaim 214:3 based on Arizal in Shaar Hakavanos p. 3, and Peri Eitz Chaim Brachos 2, and that so should be followed, as we do not apply the rule of Safek Brachos Lihakel to the Arizal.

[134] As a) Perhaps the missed word was part of the main dialect of the Sages; b) Perhaps we rule like the Kaf Hachaim ibid in name of Arizal, that if one misses even one word of the short blessings he does not fulfill his obligation.

[135] See Admur 187:4 that one must hear the beginning of the long blessing; M”B 187:4

[136] See Admur 66:12 regarding which words may be skipped in Emes Veyatziv; 68:1 regarding Shemoneh Esrei; 187:4 regarding which words may be skipped in Birchas Hamazon; Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:4 footnote 31 regarding which words may be skipped in Havdala

[137] Admur 296:18 in parentheses “And even if he did not hear at all the blessing over the wine, he is Yotzei”; Kuntrus Achron 272:2 “It is incorrect to say that every Kos Shel Bracha requires a blessing of Hagafen…as in truth a Kos Shel Bracha is not dependent at all on the blessing of Borei Peri Hagafen as we see from the fact one can make Kiddush in middle of a meal without saying the blessing of Hagafen.”; Kuntrus Achron 299:3 “It is proper to say Havdalah without a blessing of Hagafen and be Yotzei Havdalah according to all, as blessings do not invalidate the Mitzvah.”, brought in Tehila Ledavid 271:18

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a Kos Shel Bracha requires the blessing of Hagafen recited over it for the sake of fulfilling the Mitzvah, and therefore one who does not drink wine cannot fulfill the Mitzvah of Kos Shel Bracha even if another person says the blessing over it. [Chacham Tzvi 168, brought in Admur 190:4, Kuntrus Achron 272:2, Tehila Ledavid 271:18] This implies that if the blessing of Hagafen was skipped, or missed by a listener, that he does not fulfill his obligation. [Tehila Ledavid ibid] 

[138] See Michaber 183:6 and Admur 183:10 that if one talked in middle of Birchas Hamazon which he is hearing from another person, then if he talked in middle of the blessing he does not fulfill his obligation. However the M”B 183:26 limits this only to a case that one did not hear the parts of Birchas Hamazon that are obligatory to be said. Thus, seemingly the same would apply here to Havdala that if one did not miss any of the main Nusach he has still fulfilled his obligation. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 271 footnote 105]

[139] Admur 213:4 “From beginning until the end”; See also Admur 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Teshuvas Harambam Pear Hador 101; Brachos 53b; Yerushalmi Brachos 8:5; Megillah 1:9; Sefer Hamichtam and Hashlama ibid; Ravya 153 and 159; Peri Chadash 124; P”M 124 M”Z 4; Rav Elyashiv, brought in Maor Hashabbos 4 that must hear both beginning and ending blessing; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:4 footnote 31 for a discussion in Poskim in whether the beginning of the blessing is needed to be heard even Bedieved

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the blessing. [Beis Yosef 124 in opinion of Rashi and Tosafus, which is the 2^nd opinion in Admur 124:11; See however Peri Chadash ibid and Mamar Mordechai 124:11] Other Poskim rule that by a Chazan with a Minyan, one fulfills his obligation if he answers Amen to a blessing, and he knows the identity of the blessing, even if he did not hear the entire blessing but only its end. [Raavad brought in Michtam and Rashbatz and Meiri Brachos 47a] Some Poskim rule that by Havdalah one fulfills his obligation even if he only heard the end of the blessing. [Rav Fisher in letters printed in Maor Hashabbos 4]

[140] Admur 213:4; 489:12 regarding Sefiras HaOmer; See also Admur 59:4; 124:10; 14; 167:14; 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Rosh Hashanah 29a; Taz 213:3; Bahag Brachos 2:7; Rif R”H 3; Rambam Shofar 2:4; Rosh R”H 3

[141] 1^st and Stam opinion  in Admur 213:4; Admur 489:12 regarding Sefiras HaOmer; See also Admur 59:4; 124:10; 14; 167:14; 183:10; 193:1; Michaber 213:3; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Rosh Hashanah 29a; Taz 213:3; All Poskim who rule that even Rabbinical commands need Kavana

[142] However, initially, he may not answer Amen if he needs to be Yotzei this blessing, but cannot due to not hearing it properly. [Admur 124:11; M”A 124:13; Bach 124]

[143] The reason: As mitzvah’s require Kavana in order to fulfill his obligation [Bahag Brachos 2:7; Rif R”H 3; Rambam Shofar 2:4; Rosh R”H 3] and this applies even to rabbinical mitzvah’s. [Opinion in Admur 60:5; 1^st and Stam opinion  in Admur 213:4; Opinion in Admur 489:12 regarding Sefiras HaOmer; Peri Chadash 475:4; M”A 489:8]

[144] 2^nd opinion in Admur 213:4 in parentheses; Admur 489:12 regarding the Sefira; [See however Admur 296:17; 6:9, explained below]; Rashba 1:458, brought in Beis Yosef 489, regarding blessings; Rama 489:3 regarding blessing of Sefira “If he had in mind to not be Yotzei”; M”A 489:8, explained in Machatzis Hashekel and P”M 489 A”A 8; Elya Raba 489:12; M”B 489:17 limits this ruling to only blessings [and not verbal Mitzvos]; Michaber 6:4 regarding Birchas Hashachar “They intend to not be Yotzei”; Tehila Ledavid 6:4 in understanding of Michaber ibid [See however Michaber 489:3 and M”B 48918 who implies one is not Yotzei unless he has Kavana to be Yotzei] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 489:8; All Poskim who rule that Rabbinical commands don’t need Kavana

Source of Admur’s ruling: This ruling of Admur that one can fulfill a verbal Mitzvah through overhearing another is a novelty that is not explicitly recorded in Poskim prior to Admur. However, it is rooted in a response of the Rashba 1:458 regarding whether one may repeat a blessing after hearing it from the Chazan, to which the Rashba answer’s that one may only do so if he had in mind to not be Yotzei, however if he had no Kavana then he is Yotzei according to those who rule that Mitzvos don’t need Kavana. This ruling of the Rashba is recorded and hinted to in the Michaber ibid and Rama ibid as well as the other Poskim. The novelty of Admur ibid is that he extends this ruling even to the Mitzvah of Sefira. It is possible to learn this way as well in the M”A ibid. as explained in the Machatzis Hasehkel and P”M ibid.

[145] The reason: As rabbinical mitzvah’s do not require Kavana in order to fulfill his obligation. [Opinion in Admur 213:4 in parentheses and opinion in Admur 60:5 and 489:12; Bach 475; M”A 60:3; Rashba Brachos 13b; Ran R”H 3 in name of Geonim]

[146] Conclusion of Admur 213:4 in parentheses “One should suspect for their words and be careful not to enter into a questionable blessing in vain”; Admur 489:12 that one who overheard the Sefira from another is to repeat the Sefira without a blessing; Implication of Rashba ibid

Contradiction from Admur 6:9: In 6:9 Admur rules that one may repeat Birchas Hashachar if he did not have in mind to fulfill his obligation. This is a change in wording from the Michaber 6:4 who says “They intend to not be Yotzei”. The wording of the Michaber ibid is based on the Rashba, while that of Admur is based on the Iggur. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol, as this seemingly contradicts the above ruling from 489:12 and 213:4 which does not allow one to repeat the blessing unless he had in mind to not be Yotzei as writes Michaber ibid. [Tehila Ledavid 6:4 asks this question and concludes with a Tzaruch Iyun Gadol] Some suggest the following explanation: By Birchas Hashevach, which is the case in 6:9, Admur holds one must have in mind to be Yotzei from another in order to fulfill his obligation, as otherwise it cannot be considered that he praised anyone. However, by Birchas Hanehenin or Mitzvos, according to one opinion even if he does not have in mind to fulfill his obligation he is nevertheless Yotzei. [Chikreiy Halachos 9:8]

Contradiction from Admur 296:17: In the end of 296:17 it is implied that if one does not have in mind to fulfill Havdala then he must repeat Havdala later. This seemingly contradicts the ruling that one possibly fulfills his obligation even if he simply heard a blessing without having in mind, and it is thus only questionable if he must repeat Havdala. See Tehila Ledavid 296:4 who raises this question. However seemingly the meaning here of Admur is as he wrote earlier in that same Halacha that “if one had in mind to not fulfill his obligation” and hence here too in the conclusion of the Halacha Admur’s intent is not that one did not have in mind to be Yotzei but rather that he had in mind to not be Yotzei.

[147] Admur 489:12 that one who overheard the Sefira from another is to repeat the Sefira without a blessing

[148] Admur 213:4

[149] Admur 213:4; 489:12 regarding Sefiras HaOmer

[150] Admur 489:12 regarding Sefiras HaOmer

[151] Heard from Rav Yehuda Leib and Eliyahu Landa Shlita; The Rebbe by Farbrengens was not heard to say blessings aloud, allowing the public to answer Amen; See also Smeh and Shach ibid that only by Milah is it an actual obligation

[152] The reason: As Admur 213:4 rules that one who hears a blessing according to some opinions is Yotzei even if he did not have intent to be Yotzei, and hence in order to prevent others from entering into this doubt we therefore recite the blessings silently.

[153] Admur 489:12 regarding Sefiras Haomer and so applies to all Brachos; Rama 489:3; M”A 489:8; Rashba ibid, brought in Beis Yosef 489; Michaber 6:4 “They intend to not be Yotzei”; Tehila Ledavid 6:4 in understanding of Michaber ibid

[154] The reason this intent helps even according to those that rule the Mitzvos do not need intent: As even according to the opinion who holds that that Mitzvos do not need intent to fulfill ones obligation, if one specifically has in mind to not fulfill his obligation everyone agrees he is not Yotzei against his will. [489:12; Rama 489:3; M”A 489:8; Chok Yaakov 489:14] However it is not enough to simply have in mind to not have intention to fulfill his obligation with him; rather he must have in mind to not fulfill his obligation. [489:12]

[155] Meaning that he negated intent to be Yotzei but did not have intent to not be Yotzei.

[156] Admur 489:12

The reason: As having in mind to not be Yotzei does not help at all according to those who hold that one does not need to have in mind at all in order to be Yotzei. [Admur ibid]

[157] As one can only be Yotzei with another “If he heard from one who is obligated in this Mitzvah” [Admur 489:1] and a woman is not obligated in Sefiras Haomer. [Admur 489:2] Likewise, male children may be under debate if they are even obligated at all in this Mitzvah [See Halacha 2C!] and even if they are, their obligation is merely due to Chinuch. [See Michaber 689:2 based on Tana Kama in Megillah 19b and so rules: Rosh; Bahag; Levush; Bach; Olas Shabbos 689:3; Peri Chadash; Beis Yosef 689 in name of Levush; Peri Megadim 689 A”A 1; M”B 689:6; Kaf Hachaim 689:11]

[158] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 489:8 based on Michaber Y.D. 274:1 regarding Leshma of Sefer Torah that it can extend for the entire duration of the writing [aside for the Azkaros]; See also Chelkas Yehoshua 4:4; Sefer Sefiras Haomer end of chapter 8

[159] Admur 213:4; [See also Admur 8:11; 104:5; 124:6; 201:5] Michaber 213:2; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Brachos 45b

[160] Admur 124:2; Degul Merivava, Chayeh Adam and other Achronim brought in M”B 124:21; See Shraga Hameir 5:55; Piskeiy Teshuvos 585 footnote 29; 124:11 footnote 106; Mishneh Halachos 13:16

[161] The reason: Whenever a person is hearing a blessing with intent to fulfill his obligation, such as by Kiddush, Havdala and blessings over fruits and Mitzvos, he may not answer Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo, being that one who hears [and fulfills his obligation] is like one who is saying it himself and it is forbidden to make an interval in the midst of a blessing. [Admur 124:2 in parentheses]

[162] Admur ibid; Chayeh Adam brought in M”B 124:21; See Shraga Hameir ibid that in such a case he also missed the words “Elokeinu Melech Haolam of the person saying the blessing; See Minchas Elazar 1:20

The reason: It is possible that even Bedieved one does not fulfill his obligation as since he made an interval between Hashem’s name and Malchus with words that were not inserted by the Sages he has therefore swerved from the wording of the blessings that was set by the Sages. [Admur ibid in parentheses]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if one answered Baruch Hu Uvarach Shemo he nevertheless fulfills his obligation. [conclusion of M”B ibid; Mahram Shick 51; Birkeiy Yosef 213:3 in name of Mahrash Abuhav; Piskeiy Teshuvos 124:11 and 585:3]

Bookmark