[Avodah] Birchos HaTorah after parshas HaTamid

[Richard Wolpoe]

On 10/23/07, Dov Kay <dov_kay at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>  A couple of weeks ago, we discussed the ideal time for saying Birchos
> HaTorah (BHT).  We clarified that the original minhag Ashkenaz was to say it
> immediately before parshas HaTamid, after birchos HaShachar, and I mentioned
> that I thought this was also minhag HaGra.  R. Wolpoe disagreed, arguing
> that it was inconsistent the Gra's well known position in OH 47 that one
> must make BHT on hirhurei Torah (contra the Mechaber).  He then argued,
> IIRC, that the attribution of this position (ie BHT before parshas HaTamid)
> comes from the Maasei Rav and was therefore unreliable as compared with Biur
> HaGra.
>

I stand corrected -  good catch!

I must correct this position.  The Biur HaGra to OH 46:8 makes it abundantly
> clear that the practice of saying BHT immediately before parshas haTamid is
> to be found in all old siddurim "mimei avoseinu",
>

Indeed the Tur follows this model as does KAJ/Breuer's. I do not  know why
the Rema [apparently] changed the order

Note:  when I taught orach Chayyim 46/47 I noted thanthere are 2 places in
the Siddur that have Mikra/Mihsna/Braisso in order

   1. After Brikas haTorah as WE have it [Birkas kohhanim etc.
   2. After Birksas haTorah as the Tur has it - Parshas hatamid  etc.

I noted this redundancy, and I speculated at the time that something must
have evolved. As I read your post I an speculating the following: That case
befoe Tamid seems to have been the original as per Ashkenaz, and the One
after Birkas Hatorah [as we have it in most Siddrurim]  seems to me al pi
hamechabeir.

KAJ preserves the original order [I attributed  to the Tur]  but also adds
the  Birkas Kohanim etc. BEFORE  Parshas Hatamid etc.

and is endorsed by the Ramban in the Yad, R. Amram Gaon and the Avudraham,
> among others.  I think the problem with relying on Biur HaGra to determine
> the Gra's halakhic positions is that he is often just giving a source for
> the position of the SA or Rema under discussion without endorsing that
> position.  In this case, however, there is no such uncertainty, as the Gra
> is ma'arich on this point and clearly sees the shift of BHT to just after
> Elokai Neshama (or Asher Yatzar, l'fi the Rema) as a later development and
> erroneous.  It seems odd to me that R. M. Sternbuch, who describes himself
> as nin v'neched m'haGra in all his seforim, writes somewhere that BHT should
> be said as soon as possible after waking, without even referencing the
> Gaon's view.
>

When I was in YU  [circa 1973] I read Rav Strerbuch's Sefer on Minhagei
HaGRA from cover to cover,one of the few Seforim that I read so ithoroughly
and intensely during my years at Yeshiva.   Perhaps my mis-perception of the
GRA's position stems from that experience via that Sefer?

As against R. Wolpoe, I do not think there is any contradiction between the
> Gra's positions regarding hirhurei Torah and BHT.  The latter is clearly
> based on the question whether divrei Torah said b'derech tefillah also
> require BHT (the subject of OH 46:8).  The Mechaber says "yesh lochush"
> for the opinion they do and the Rema says that the custom is that they
> don't.  The Gra paskens that they do not.  This is a different question
> from whether hirhurei Torah b'derech limud, as opposed to b'derech tefillah,
> require BHT.
> I hope this clarifies matters.
>
> Kol tuv
> Dov Kay
>
> <http://www.pimpmylive.co.uk>
>
Yishar Kochehca. It does clarify the GRA's position quite a bit. And I am at
a loss to explain my earlier presumption except to say that it seemed to me
a POPULAR notion that this was the GRA's postion.

So from now on Say R. Wolpoe's earlier position! [Mishan Rishona] and until
further notice or further research I am hozeir to teach like Dov Kay on this
matter

Your post explains another GRAthat troubled me. viz How come saying Krias
Shemai s NOT construed as Talmud Torah legabei considering Ahava Rabbah as
birkas hatorah.   The Rema's position would be clear - since Krias Shema is
said bederech Tefillah ergo it is not construed as Talmud Torah.  Now I can
get the GRA's position. Caveat:  SO LONG as Krias Shema is said bizmano.
After that it is indeed contsrued as Talmud Torah as per the Mishna - SEE MB
on rectiing Krias Shema  on  9 Av when putting on Tefillin.  I hve more to
quibble with this MB  al pi a Tur I learned recently.

Question: Would the GRA hold like the Rema that Birkas haTorah not be said
before Selichos?

And now for your next ACT can you explain Artscroll's position on printing
the parshiyos of Kadesh li and V'haya ki yeviacha BEFORE bircas hatorah?!
Are they derech Techina?


-- 
Kol Tuv / Best Regards,
RabbiRichWolpoe at Gmail.com
Please Visit:
http://nishmablog.blogspot.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20071023/64745ed8/attachment-0001.htm>