[Avodah] New Brachos

[rabbirichwolpoe at gmail.com]

> But in fact, were you correct, in the times of Chazal themselves it
> would have meant that there would have been no brocha on kriat hatorah
> on Yom Tov, because there was no targum on yom tov (see Mesechet Sofrim
> perek 18 halacha 6...
> But of course nobody suggests such a thing, ie that there was or should
> be no brocha on kriat hatorah on Yom Tov because a metargeman was
> not established on such days. So why would you expect even the strict
> constructionists to say there was a safek bracha here?

Ein hachi nami - this mamash proves my point beyond any doubt. Aside
from the Yomtov strawman which is a red herring the key is following
Hazal NOT in having or lacking a m'turg'man contrary to Hazal!

SO When hazal legilsate no meturgeman, then we DO say the brachah -
davka because this follows Hazal

But when on Shabbos WE - contrary to Hazal - omit the Targum, we no
longer conform to Hazal's taqqnanah and brachah is problematic
Just like hallell bedilug!
Of course when Hazal omit a targum on a controversial passuq, that IS
strict construction. Aderabbah adding Targum AGAINST Hazal [such as on
a restricted passuq or on YT] would jeopardize the brachah! That's the
point of strict construction, not playing any games with Hazal's dictates!

So The key for a strict constructionist is NOT to morph Hazal to make
a brachah on Ner Hanukkah in shul either. It simply lacks Talmudic
approval. Morphed circumstances is not a legitimate trigger You might
as well go along with Ran on nashim somchot r'shut and allow women to
bench lulav etc. Which is the flexible position favored by ashk'naz.

Similarly it is against strict construction to make a brachah on Hallel
in shul at night. But since this IS minhag has'phardim, [be'er hagolah]
there is room to be lenient for S'phardim as per BIC and Kaf HaHayyim.

While there is no such leniency for an ashkknazi Jew - and s'feiq
brachos l'haqeil.

> then it would seem you do not see the halacha on any level as being
> about truth.

Tannur achnai



> Sheasani k'rotzono is surely a bracha of shevach, but ROY says you should
> say it without shem or malchus.

Abudarham p.69
    V'hanashim nohagos l'vareich bimqom "shelo asani isha" "she'asani
    kirtzono" k'mee shmatzdiq es haddin hara'ah habbah alav"

IOW it's like "dayyan ho'emes" I'm not sure if that is "shevach" or not,
you can be the judge If "dayan ho'emes" is shevach.

KT
RRW
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile