<html><body>
<p>RMarBl replied to me:<br>
>> BTW, mei'inyan l'inyan: do you know why "shehecheyanu" isn't made by a b'ris (which surely is a "qiyum bequm va'asei")? The "Sharashei Minhag Ashk'naz" Vol1 piece on this topic is worthwhile.... <<<br>
> Actually the minhag in EY is to make a shehecheyanu at a Bris. <<br>
Yes (for details l'halachah, see SA YD 265:7 and nos'ei keilim), and as per Rav Hamburger, this started w/ RaMBaM (Hilchos Milah 3:3 [NB: in my "Sharashei" volume, the source is listed as 3:5] and B'rachos 11:9) but is not at all mentioned in the Talmud, by the G'onim, or by any other early pos'qim (in fact, the Tos'fos specifically explain why this b'rachah is *not* made -- e.g. see BT Sukkah 46a d'h' ha-oseh and BT B'choros 49a d'h' l'achar) and was not accepted by S'faradim before the Inquisition-related geirush S'farad (sources include the ba'al Ohel Moeid, RaShBA, and RaN). Accordingly, as noted by the BY (I don't have a Tur YD at home, but Rav Hamburger refers to YD 265 d'h' [any transliteration mistake mine] shedar), what became minhag e'Y' us'vivoseha (language found in SA YD 265:7) certainly has a basis in RaMBaM, but what was the RaMBaM's basis? (Lest one consider this merely an argument from the absence of a positive statement not to make the b'rachah, such no-shehecheyanu-by-b'ris statements are replete among the Rishonim, as hinted above re Tos'fos, but read the article -- it's too long to be reproduced via pager :-).)<br>
<br>
Chag Sameach and all the best from<br>
--Michael Poppers via RIM pager<br>
</body></html>