[Avodah] Yom Tov Sheni for Olim LeReget to the Beit Mikdash

[Zev Sero]

rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com wrote:
> RZS:
>> You have it backwards.  RT doesn't start with a premise that one can
>> say a bracha on a minhag, and "leverage" that to allow the bracha on
>> Hallel.  He *starts* with the gemara about Hallel, which strongly
>> implies that they did say a bracha on it, and *concludes* that one
>> says a bracha on something that is said because of a minhag, but not
>> on an action that is done because of minhag.
> 
> Actually Rashi specifically argues
> "NO brachah on minhag!"
> 
> His source?
> Shas says minhag nevi'im does NOT trigger a bracha! It's quoted iirc
> in Sefer Haprdes etc. RT is mechaddesh otherwise. Not mechaddesh the
> brachah per se, but the general principle.

RT is not mechadesh against an explicit gemara; no need for the Sefer
Hapardes, RT quotes it himself. His whole point is that there are two
gemaras that have to be reconciled, and he does so by distinguishing
between action and speech.  A minhag to say something gets a bracha,
a minhag to do something doesn't.



> FWIW RT and Tosafos proof is weak re: Hallel on Rosh Hodesh because
> the brachah on Hallel probably came later than Rav in the
> aforementioned story. Tosafos pre-supposes the brachah existed
> during Rav's time.  This is speculative.

Do you mean to suggest that in Rav's time they *never* said a bracha
on Hallel, even when it's definitely an obligation?  How could they
*not* say a bracha on it then?


-- 
Zev Sero                      The trouble with socialism is that you
zev at sero.name                 eventually run out of other people’s money
                                                     - Margaret Thatcher