[Avodah] The Dynamic of Post-Talmudic Brachos

[rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com]

RAM:
> R' Rich Wolpoe wrote:
>> When did ner shabbos get a brachah? As per Maggid Mishnah [hilchos
>> shabbos 5:1] it's Seder Rav Amram Gaon. If so this list [of 7 derbannan's]
>> is NOT Talmudic. - but a bit later.

> The Maggid Mishnah's actual words are: "Kach kasuv b'Seder Rav Amram,
> v'chen hiskimu kol ha'acharonim z"l." In my view this falls far short
> of something like "Rav Amram tiken bracha al ner Shabbos".

> RRW seems to be interpreting the Maggid Mishnah to mean that until Rav
> Amram's time, no bracha was said on Ner Shabbos. I do not see that from
> this source.

OK let's lump some brachos together.
    She'asani kirtzono [Abudarham]
    Hanosein laya'ef ko'ach [Tur O H 46 quoting siddurei Ashkenaz]
    Baruch H' L'olam [Ma'ariv]
    Meqadeish es shimhca barabbim [Tur]
    Birkas Hallel on R"Ch [R"T]
    Ner Hanukkah in shul [S"A O H 671:8]

*******************

TA"Z on Orach Hayyim 46:7 WRT "hanoseih laya'eif ko'ach" 

Takes an approach which "nails it" AISI.
Noting a serious steerah Between 2 Ro"Sh's one saying "...lo matzinu shum brachah shelo huzkara baTalmud..."
The other "zos habracha tiqnuha ha'gonim u'mistabeir.."

Essentially:

1 Everything brachah in the Talmud is "axiomatic" - a given

IF the minhag [Catholic Israel] is to say the brachah -even If it's
post-Talmud "ein l'vatlah"
So "Talmudic" does not exactly equate to Post-talmudic BUT Post-Talmudic
brachos can be legit.

Now see Rambam Haqdama on post-Talmudic Taqqanos/G'zeiros/Minhaggim.  

Talmud is binding because all Israel [Catholic Israel] accepts it.
Anything later is local [but can be Nispasheit. See Rambam on the
obligation to recite Arvit]

Now see the aforementioned Maggid Mishneh. I am convinced it matches
the Ta"z. Why?

He brings TWO factors
A Gaon [viz. Rav Amram]
AND
The acceptance of all [his] acharonim [that equates to minhag or Cath
Israel]

This fits the Ta"z's thesis to a "T"

[Note I'm not saying that there are no other reads of this MM. What I
AM saying is: with my read all these sources fit together neatly]

Now see Abudarham WRT She'assani kirtzono - not in Talmud but it is
either A minhag or THE minhag as he reports it. This too fits Ta"Z.

Now the brachos in Tur. Since they are in Siddurei Ashkenaz, they pass
minhag [Cath. Israel]

M'chabeir himself proposes the non-Talmudic use of Birkas Ner Hanukkah
in shul, which does NOT conform to ner-ish-uveiso. It's a Post-Talmudic
use of the brachah

R"T proposes brachah on Hallel for R"Ch. [This it might be Talmudic or
might be minhag. It's a gray area.]


Those brachos such as "magbi'aH sh'falim" fail minhag. Thus they get
rejected completely.

Summary: with this approach it lays out the issue simply
A Talmudic Brachos are a "national" given
B Post-Talmudic Brachos are taluy on the minhag.

-------------------------

Now you'll pretty much be able to intuit my understanding of Post-Talmudic
g'zeiros too.

Viz.

A Talmudic G'zeiros are a "national" given
B Post-Talmudic G'zeiros are taluy on the minhag. Or the acceptance or
Catholic Israel.

I haven't seen the Ro"Sh on PT g'zeiros.
I'm suggesting in the meantime that he might be saying:

One may not IMPOSE PT g'zeiros but one may indeed PROPOSE them. 

Caveat:
The weak-link is that with brachos - that latitude seems to be limitted
to Gaonim.

While with g'zeiros I'm not requiring a Gaonic initiative. [though the
Rambam might have.]

Otherwise my approach is m'yussad on this Ta"z and the MM AIUI

Another Caveat:
the Mechabeir rejects Hanosein layaakeif ko'oach and Afaik she'assni
kirtzono is said by Sephardim w/o sheim umalchus. So it follows that
ROY might reject this entire thesis as non-comformist to the Mechabeir.
Which is why I kinda dismiss ROY's approach as tied to a different
paradigm.

As above Mechabeir himself has proposed the non-Talmudic use of Birkas
Ner Hanukkah
In shul, which does NOT conform to ner-ish-uveiso. The SA here is using
an Ashk'nazic dynamic here and the no'sei keilim note that. And that
it does not match his stand opposing Birkas Hallel on R"Ch.

There you have it. The conjunction of Rambam, Maggid Mishneh and Taz
provide the foundations for this approach.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile