We are continuing our study of Birkat Hamazon (Grace after Meals). We have given an extensive introduction and looked at the first three berachot (blessings). We talked about what each berachah means, what it says, and who established it. We also talked about various halachot (Jewish laws). In the second berachah, we went in depth about women’s obligations, saying Brit veTorah (covenant and Torah), and what happens there. At the end of the last class, we discussed Boneh Yerushalayim (Builder of Jerusalem). We are up to the fourth and final berachah of Birkat HaTov VeHaMetiv (the One who is good and does good).
I think it is appropriate to have a separate class on this berachah because, as we will see in the course of our learning, it is fundamentally different from the first three berachot of Birkat Hamazon. We have already noted that the rabbis call Birkat Hamazon Shalosh Berachot (three blessings). That nickname already tells you that, at its core, Birkat Hamazon was really intended to be only three berachot—three berachot from the Torah. By most accounts, the fourth berachah, Birkat HaTov HaMetiv, was added later in history by the rabbis, in response to an event we will discuss in our first source.
We will see that some sources argue that perhaps HaTov HaMetiv is a de'oraita (from the Torah) berachah, and that it, too, comes from the Torah, so Birkat Hamazon was always four berachot. But that will be considered a minority opinion and ultimately was not accepted. You will see how this manifests in the halachah. We will see in practice how we identify Birkat HaTov HaMetiv as de'rabbanan (from the rabbis). That is why it has certain properties and certain halachot that differ from the other three berachot.
Let us go to our first source, Masechet Berachot (Tractate Berachot), Mem Chet amud bet (folio 48b). We have seen this source already because it is the source for all the berachot of Birkat Hamazon. I thought we should repeat it as a good review, and we will see that at the end it brings HaTov HaMetiv.
The Gemara says that Rav Nachman said Moshe Rabbeinu established the first berachah of Birkat Hamazon, known as Birkat HaZan (the blessing of the Sustainer). “Zan” means nourishing, sustaining. That berachah is about how Hashem sustains every creature in the world with nourishment and sustenance. When did Moshe write the text of this berachah? When Hashem brought the manna down from heaven for Bnei Yisrael (the children of Israel). That was one of the clear episodes that revealed not Hashem’s ability, but His care for everything that needs nourishment. This does not mean that Moshe established the concept of Birkat Hamazon. It always existed and predates him. Moshe wrote the words, the actual text of the berachah.
Yehoshua established the wording for the second berachah, known as Birkat Ha'aretz, the blessing of the land: “Al ha'aretz ve'al hamazon.” That is in the pasuk (verse): “Ve'achalta ve'savata uverachta et Adonai Elohecha al ha'aretz hatovah asher natan lach” (You shall eat, be satisfied, and bless God for the good land He gave you). We see that there is a lot of emphasis on the land itself and blessing the land itself.
“Keivan shenichnesu la'aretz” (when they entered the land). Once Bnei Yisrael entered the Land of Israel and Yehoshua conquered it, he saw the beauty and greatness of Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) and all its fruits. Therefore, he was the right person to be metaken (establish) the nusach (wording) for the second berachah of Birkat Hamazon, called Birkat Ha'aretz. Of course, it is obvious that Moshe could not write the berachah of Birkat Ha'aretz. He never went to Eretz Yisrael. Moshe Rabbeinu did not cross the land. You see that each of these great people established a berachah based on their experiences, and on how they related to Hashem and how Hashem provides mazon (food).
David and Shlomo together established the berachah of Boneh Yerushalayim. “David tikken al Yisrael amecha ve'al Yerushalayim irecha,” or, as we say, “al Yisrael amecha ve'al Yerushalayim irach.” David was the one who established the Ir HaBirah (the city of the capital), Yerushalayim (Jerusalem), Ir David, right? So he focused on Yerushalayim. “Shlomo tikken al habayit hagadol vehakadosh.” Shlomo inserted those words, “al habayit hagadol vehakadosh,” about the great, holy temple, because Shlomo built the Beit HaMikdash (Temple).
You can imagine that over time they had to amend parts of the text of Birkat Hamazon, shinu et hanusach (changed the wording), based on the chava'ot (experiences) they were having in Am Yisrael. After the Beit HaMikdash was destroyed, the berachah had to change. It was written by David and Shlomo when they had control of Eretz Yisrael and Yerushalayim, and they had the Beit HaMikdash and everything was good. When the Beit HaMikdash was destroyed, of course the text of the berachah had to change. When you read Birkat Hamazon, you hear things about Mashiach Tzidkeinu (our righteous Messiah). Those things did not exist back then because they had everything they needed.
The first three berachot were established by Moshe, Yehoshua, David, and Shlomo, great figures in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible), based on their different experiences in their own times. HaTov HaMetiv, the topic for tonight, was established by the sages of Yavne. “HaTov HaMetiv beYavne tiknuha, keneged harugei Beitar.” Yavne is a city in the south, in the south of Eretz Yisrael. It is famous because they moved the center of limud Torah (Torah study) from Yerushalayim to Yavne after the Romans destroyed the second Beit HaMikdash.
There is a very famous story in the Gemara, Masechet Gittin (Tractate Gittin), which most people study on Tisha B'Av (the Ninth of Av). The great leader of the Jewish people at the time of the destruction of Beit Sheni (the Second Temple), during the Roman period, was a rabbi named Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai. He was considered the political and rabbinic leader of the day. His students took him to meet Vespasian, the Roman general who was surrounding Yerushalayim and was ready to conquer it.
The Gemara tells us that Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai met Vespasian and told him that he would become the Roman emperor and that great things would happen to him. A few minutes after they spoke, a messenger came and told them that the Roman emperor had died and Vespasian would become the new Roman emperor. Vespasian was shocked that this Jew, this rabbi, had basically predicted the future. He said, “I grant you three wishes. Three bakashot (requests). Ask for whatever you want.” One of the three things Rabbi Yochanan requested was, “Ten li Yavne vechachameha” (Give me Yavne and its sages). Give me the city of Yavne and its scholars, its rabbis, so that we can restart limud Torah after the churban (destruction).
Some rabbis were upset. Rabbi Akiva, for example, was very angry with Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai. Why didn’t he ask Vespasian to leave? “Don’t destroy the Beit HaMikdash; leave, spare the Beit HaMikdash.” Some rabbis explained that Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai did not think Vespasian would grant him that, so he did not want to ask for something he would not be given. “I’m not going to get it, so why should I ask for it?” He asked instead, “I know you’re going to destroy Yerushalayim. I know you’re going to destroy the Beit HaMikdash.” Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai was thinking ahead. “We need a new merkaz (center). We need a new center for limud Torah.” He made it Yavne.
All the hachamim (sages) went south and set up what they called Kerem BeYavne (Vineyard of Yavne). They set up a Beit Midrash (study hall) with rows, and it looked like a vineyard, like a kerem, so they called it Kerem BeYavne. Yavne became a major center of the Gemara.
“What? KBY. Yeshivat Kerem BeYavne.”
“Yeah. So that is the city of Yavne.”
The rabbis tell us here in the Gemara, Berachot: “HaTov HaMetiv.” They established the berachah of HaTov HaMetiv, the fourth and final berachah of Birkat Hamazon. “BeYavne tiknuha, keneged harugei Beitar.” What does that mean? “Keneged harugei Beitar.”
About 70 years after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash, there was a lot of commotion about a potential uprising against the Romans. The Romans were still in charge, even after they destroyed the Beit HaMikdash, and they were very restrictive toward the Jewish people in their study of Torah. That was during the time of the Ten Martyrs, before that, so they made many rules against limud Torah. They caused the Jewish people a lot of suffering and pain. There was talk of a revolt, a mered (revolt) against the Romans. Who led it? A man named Bar Kokhba. Really, Bar Koziva was his name. They called him Bar Kokhba because people believed he was the Mashiach (Messiah). Rabbi Akiva was among those who strongly supported him.
The Bar Kokhba revolt centered around the town, called a city, of Beitar. There was a vicious battle in which the Romans slaughtered tens of thousands of Jews. Some people estimate that hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed in the city of Beitar.
They did not allow the Jews to bury, likbor (to bury), any of the people who had been killed. The Romans wanted to make an example of them so there would be no more revolts. After they annihilated the revolt, they left the bodies to rot and did not give the Jews permission to bury them. A little later, the Romans finally gave permission to bury the dead, the slain, those who had been killed. On that day, they established a special berachah because they had received permission to bury the people. It was good that Hashem made a nes (miracle). What was the miracle? None of the bodies had decomposed; they all remained intact. So they made a berachah. Even though the story is sad and tragic, the hachamim still gave thanks for the ability to bring these people to their final resting place in a way that was not shameful or embarrassing to them. They attached that berachah as a permanent part of Birkat Hamazon.
You might ask, “Rabbi, what in the world does this berachah—it’s a very nice berachah—have to do with Birkat Hamazon? What does this have to do with Birkat Hamazon? Everything has to do with goodness. All of a sudden, HaTov HaMetiv. Okay, we understand that it is hoda'ah (thanks) to Hashem, but it is a somewhat tragic hoda'ah. Why did we put it into Birkat Hamazon?”
Piskei HaRosh, by Rabbeinu Asher, tries to answer this in the second source. He says that because this is a berachah of thanksgiving, of hoda'ah to Hashem, the hachamim said there is no better place to put it than Birkat Hamazon. Why? Because Birkat Hamazon is entirely thanksgiving. That is different from, for example, the Amidah (standing prayer), the tefillah (prayer) that we have three times a day, which has several sections. We have praise, requests, and then a message. But Birkat Hamazon is all thanksgiving to Hashem. So the rabbis said, “What is the best place to put it? Put it in Birkat Hamazon.” If a berachah gives thanks to Hashem, even for something with a somewhat tragic story, it still belongs in Birkat Hamazon. That is the right place for it.
“Ve'amrinan b'Yerushalmi,” the Rosh adds, “k'shenichreva Beitar, nigde'ah keren Yisrael.” When Beitar was destroyed, the horn of Israel was cut off, meaning a major part of their identity. It would never come back. He also explains why they added it to Birkat Hamazon: they placed it right next to the berachah of Boneh Yerushalayim to show that the two have something in common. One leads to the other. We pray for Hashem to rebuild Yerushalayim by bringing the Mashiach. That will also bring redemption to all those who were killed in the rebellions against the Romans. In the future, through ben David, who is born in Yerushalayim, the keren Yisrael is going to return. It was lost during the battle at Beitar.
Beitar was a special city before this story. I think it was a major place before then. I don’t know; it’s possible that it was. I think it became important because of this story. But it clearly was a place with a lot of military presence. It was a strategic place where they thought they could defeat the Romans, but it did not happen. That, I think, made it best known. I think that is why most people know the city. It is a beautiful city with the same name. They have a good soccer team, too, right? The second? They have the jersey—the black and gold, black and gold, black and yellow. What’s the green one? The green one is—okay, you’re testing me on Israeli football. I don’t know.
That is a little bit of background, reka, to the berachah of HaTov HaMetiv, where it came from and who established it. There is some discussion about the nusach of HaTov HaMetiv, so it is good that Stella brought us the siddurim (prayer books). Let’s open the siddur for a minute. If you have one at home, open it up. Page 225 in the Kol Yaakov. It is important to notice something about HaTov HaMetiv. It comes at the end, on page 230. What do you notice right away about Birkat HaTov HaMetiv, which we will see is debated by the Gemara? I will point out two things.
“Not exactly the same place. You have a whole story next to a Palestinian Arabic village, but it’s like—”
So, two things you notice about the text. First, it opens again with “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam” (Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe). Why is that strange? If you look at the previous berachot, the beginning of Birkat Hamazon begins, “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam, Ha'el hazan otanu,” et cetera. Then you get to the next berachah, and it does not open with Baruch: “Nodeh Lecha.” The third berachah: “Rachem Hashem Elokeinu.” Only the first berachah opens with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” The second and third do not. Why is that? Why doesn’t every berachah start with “Baruch Atah Hashem”? Berachot should start with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” Who remembers the concept?
We have a concept in berachot: when you have berachot that are semuchot, one next to the other, they are connected. When you have a berachah semuchah lechaverta (a blessing adjoining another), only the first berachah has to open with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” Every other berachah can open with whatever words it uses. It does not have to be pote'ach be-baruch. Where else do we have this? The Amidah. We talked about it a little before, but some people are new, so it is good to review it.
The rule is that whenever you have a series of several berachot together, the first one starts with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” The others do not have to start that way because they piggyback; they are moshech (drawn) from the first berachah. The Amidah is the best example. The first starts with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” The other berachot open however they want. They end with “Baruch Atah Hashem,” but they do not open with it. You see that in Birkat Hamazon, too. The first berachah says “Baruch Atah Hashem,” and the next two do not. Suddenly, when we get to this one, we have “Baruch Atah Hashem.” That immediately tells us something. We should say, “Wait a minute. If this were a berachah connected to the previous berachot, it should not start with ‘Baruch Atah Hashem.’ It should just open with its own words.” This tells me it is separate from the others. What would separate them? The idea that the first three are a group from the Torah, and the last was added by the rabbis at a later time.
So it is mid'rabbanan. To separate it and highlight that it is different, we start again with “Baruch Atah Hashem.”
“Yes, but how is this from the Torah if it is only as though Shlomo and David later established the wording?”
“The basic concept of three berachot comes from the Torah. They say, ‘Uve'achalta vesavata uverachta et Hashem Elokecha, al ha'aretz hatovah asher natan lach.’ In that pasuk, you have all the different concepts. You make the berachah for being satisfied, for the satisfaction; al ha'aretz is for the land; Hashem natan lach. Yerushalayim and the Beit HaMikdash. The scholars looked at the pasuk and saw three things that a person needs to bless, three things that you have to make a berachah for in Birkat Hamazon. But HaTov HaMetiv is an addition mid'rabbanan. It is completely mid'rabbanan. So, to make clear the distinction, the hachamim started again with ‘Baruch Atah Hashem.’”
“Isn’t it also praise, I feel, to God, as opposed to the other things that I thought were—”
“They’re more thanksgiving? Hoda'ah?”
“It’s more praiseworthy, but its intention is to give hoda'ah for all the good things Hashem gives. Sometimes praise and hoda'ah have a very close relationship.”
“So this one comes after?”
“Yes.”
“And it’s not from the Torah?”
“Not from the Torah. From the rabbis. That’s what this seems to indicate.”
“What is the last part? The Harachamans?”
“All the Harachamans and the makdil. All of this is already in the kashor. We will see. I’m going to read you what Rabbi Eliezer Melamed says in Peninei Halakha about the Harachamans and when they came to be. But really, the end of Birkat Hamazon is after the blessing of the good and the good. That’s the end.”
“In the short version, do they not say this?”
“I have to look at it again, but I think they added it—no, they have to add it. We even add it. It is added for them for sure because it is mid'rabbanan; they still have to put it in. It is in Al HaMichyah (for the sustenance). If you turn a few pages, you’ll see that in Me'en Shalosh (summary of three), even though we call it Me'en Shalosh, it is really Me'en Arba. It really has all of them. If you look at the Me'en Shalosh on pages 234 and 235, on page 235 it says, ‘Ki atah tov u'metiv lakol’ (For You are good and do good to all). That part is the hint to Birkat HaTov VeHaMetiv. Then you have ‘al tenuvat hasadeh’ (for the produce of the field); that is the mazon. ‘eretz chemdah tovah’ (a desirable and good land); that is Birkat Ha'aretz. ‘Lachem Hashem Elohim’; that is Boneh Yerushalayim. And ‘ki atah tov u'metiv lakol’ is Birkat HaTov VeHaMetiv. So in Me'en Shalosh you can find each of the four berachot. HaTov HaMetiv is there, which is why I would most likely assume that it is there as well.”
There is another davar me'anyen (interesting matter) about HaTov HaMetiv. You see that it says “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam,” so we also have to have malchut (kingship). Why? Because we said that every berachah has to have two ingredients. What are they? “Kol berachah chayav lihyot bah shem u'malchut” (Every blessing must contain the Name and kingship). Every berachah has to have two things: shem (the name of Hashem) and malchut. You obviously have to use Hashem’s name, but you also have to say something that relates to Hashem as Melech HaOlam (King of the universe), something about malchut. So we always say, “Elokeinu Melech HaOlam.” In the Amidah we say, “Elokei Avraham, Elokei Yitzchak, Elokei Yaakov” (God of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob). That already has “HaEl HaGadol HaGibor” (the great and mighty God)—Melech HaOlam. Here you see that we actually have a lot of “melech.” We have, in fact, three times, shalosh pe'amim, the word melech. When? “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam”—that is the first melech. “La'ad, ha'El, avinu, malkeinu, adireinu, boreinu, go'aleinu, kedosheinu, kedosh Yaakov, ro'einu, ro'eh Yisrael, ha-melech ha-tov ve-ha-metiv lakol.” Three times in this berachah we have the word melech. That is very interesting. We do not usually find that in other berachot.
Now look at the next source, page 2, Berachot Mem Tet amud alef (folio 49a). We will see all of this. It was a machloket (dispute) between Abba Yosef ben Dostai and the hachamim. What was their machloket? “Had amar”—one said this, the other said that. What is the point of difference here? Why would one opinion say you have to have it and the other say you do not? Why would I not have to have it? Exactly: if it is a berachah semuchah lechaverta, I do not need “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam.” I take it from the first berachah and continue.
The opinion that says einah tzerichah malchut (it does not need kingship) is saying that HaTov HaMetiv is part of the whole Birkat Hamazon and is also de'oraita. The other opinion says that you have to start again with “Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam.” That opinion is saying it is a new berachah, because it is derabbanan. The opinion that says it needs malchut holds that it is not connected to the preceding berachot, so it needs its own beginning. The one who says it does not need malchut, meaning that it takes the malchut from the preceding berachot, holds that it is de'oraita. You see that the machloket has a major hashpa'ah (effect), a nafka minah (practical implication), for the nusach: how are we going to frame this berachah?
“Yes? Okay. Rashi is basically what I explained to you.”
Skip down to the bottom of Berachot Mem Tet. It needs to have Melech HaOlam. The Gemara asks, “What is the chiddush (innovation)? What are you teaching me? Why?” Any berachah that does not have Melech HaOlam is surely not a good berachah, so why single it out and tell me that it needs it? He says, “I’ll tell you why. Really, it has to have malchut twice. Chada dida”—one time for itself, because every berachah needs malchut. What did Rabbi Yochanan mean when he said HaTov HaMetiv needs malchut? He was not talking about the standard malchut that every berachah has. The Gemara says, “Vechada deBoneh Yerushalayim.” Rabbi Zeira says we are missing malchut from the third berachah. There is no malchut in Boneh Yerushalayim. We add an extra malchut to HaTov HaMetiv to make up for what is missing in Boneh Yerushalayim.
“Why don’t you like that? They’re correcting the idea in Shlomo’s book.”
“What do you mean? Not correcting, but adding, as if something were missing.”
“There is a bigger question, though, that the Gemara is going to ask and frame even better. Stella is saying, ‘I don’t need melech. Why are they saying it is missing if I don’t need it in the first place? And proof that I don’t need it is that it is part—where else don’t we have a melech? What about the other berachah?’ If you are telling me I have to make up the malchut missing in Boneh Yerushalayim, I am also missing a malchut in Birkat Ha'aretz, in Nodeh Lecha. There is no malchut there. So why make up only the malchut from Boneh Yerushalayim and not the one from Birkat Ha'aretz? How is it different? The Gemara says: if you are telling me I have to make up the lack of malchut, I need three. I should have three.”
“One second. It says, ‘One for itself and one for and one for.’”
“The person said before that they only need two. They did not get to three. We saw that we have three, but at this point in the Gemara they say, ‘No, we need only two.’ Rather, why don’t we have to make up for it? Obviously, as Stella said, I don’t need melech. If I don’t need it there, I would not need it in Boneh Yerushalayim. There is no reason to set Boneh Yerushalayim apart from Birkat Ha'aretz. They are the same. If I need it for one, I need it for both; if I need it for neither, I need it for neither. So I shouldn’t—what am I doing here? You need the problem.”
We are still trying to figure out what all these extra malchuyot are. The Gemara gives a different answer. You are right: by law, I do not need malchut for Birkat Ha'aretz, and I do not need malchut for Boneh Yerushalayim. The Gemara says that in Boneh Yerushalayim we talk about malchut Beit David (the kingship of David’s house). We give a lot of shevach (praise) to malchut Beit David. What do we say? That He should bring the Mashiach back. Bring malchut Beit David back to its place. This is what I meant when I said that David would never have put those words in the berachah when he wrote it. They do not fit that time. Of course, those words were changed and added later, after the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. You can see little hints of where they are, but in the end we mention, pray for, and praise malchut Beit David.
As the Gemara says, “Kasheh lanu”—it is difficult for us to mention malchut Beit David and not mention what? Malchut Shamayim (the kingship of Heaven). We pray, “Hashem, give us back malchut Beit David,” but we do not say that we should bring back malchut Shamayim. What about the yoke of malchut Shamayim? What about the great kingdom of Hashem? Do we want the kingdom of David only, and not the kingdom of Hashem? The Gemara is saying that the rabbis who made the berachah of HaTov HaMetiv looked at the preceding berachah and said, “Something does not fit here. We mention malchut Beit David but not malchut Shamayim. Let’s add one more malchut.” We add an extra malchut to HaTov HaMetiv to make up for not mentioning malchut Shamayim when we talked about malchut Beit David. That is why there are two. One is Melech HaOlam for the general berachah; the other is the Melech HaOlam we are missing when we mention malchut Beit David but do not mention malchut Shamayim.
“So they didn’t edit these words. They edited the hachamim who ended that.”
“You can argue that, yes, perhaps.”
Now Rav Papa says, “Rav Papa amar, hachi ka'amar, tzerichah shtei malchuyot lebar midideh.” At the end, he adds, “Be'emet hachi ka'amar.” He gives a different answer. Why do we have three? Not because we are missing the malchut of Boneh Yerushalayim and also the malchut of Birkat Ha'aretz. Rather, when it says that you need two malchuyot, the Gemara means two malchuyot in addition to the original melech, which is Melech HaOlam, the usual requirement. What do you need? “One for itself and one for and one for.” One for Birkat Ha'aretz. The Gemara is saying that even though it is a berachah and you do not have to put in melech, we want to make up for the missing melech. We feel connected to the missing melech, so they put in two more melechs to make up for the two that were missing from the previous berachot.
Once we are restarting and mentioning Melech HaOlam anyway, we do not need to give the answer about malchut Beit David. We do not need that. It is the two malchuyot missing from Birkat Ha'aretz and Boneh Yerushalayim, and that is why we have three. That is a different opinion. That is why we have three Melech HaOlam. No, because of the malchut of Hashem, since we mentioned malchut Beit David. Okay, no problem. Don’t wait for me; everyone else go ahead.
What else do you notice? Once we have said melech three times, everything we mention in Birkat HaTov HaMetiv comes in threes. For example, what do we say? “HaMelech ha-tov ve-ha-metiv shebechol yom yom hu heitiv lanu, hu meitiv lanu, hu yeitiv lanu; hu gemalanu, hu gomleinu, hu yigmeleinu” (He has done good, does good, and will do good for us; He has rewarded us, rewards us, and will reward us). So, avar, hoveh, atid (past, present, future), for each of those things. Why do we do it in threes? Because once we said melech three times, we decided that the whole structure of the berachah should be in threes. “Hu heitiv, hu meitiv, hu yeitiv; hu heitiv, hu meitiv, hu yeitiv; hu gemalanu, hu gomleinu, hu yigmeleinu.” Everything comes in threes to match the three times we said melech. That is why it is so long.
“I have a question about the previous part. We said we have two because we are missing the kings, but then we said it is either that we need them for both or we do not need them at all. So they gave a different reason?”
“No, it is because we need the kingship of Hashem. But that was only at the point when they thought there were only two, including the beginning, ‘King of the world.’ If we need only two, then one is for the berachah itself and one is so there is not a heavenly kingdom without the kingdom of David. Then Rav Papa changed the answer completely. He said you do not have to say that. Really, it is three times: once for the berachah itself, once for Boneh Yerushalayim, and once for Birkat Ha'aretz.”
“So we don’t need malchut Beit David?”
“We don’t need malchut Beit David.”
“But then you ask again: if it is the same berachah, why do we need—”
“What do you mean, if it is the same berachah?”
“If they are all three connected, because he thinks it does not matter if it is a berachah semuchah lechaverta—even if it is a berachah semuchah lechaverta and they don’t remember the king—when, in the true good, we started again with the king. We want to add it. Let’s add it.”
“He just thought that way. Okay, that is what he suggested. If we mention the King of the world—if we didn’t have HaTov HaMetiv, I’ll say it in English for everyone, because we’re going in and out of Hebrew and English, thanks to the final Wednesdays—if we didn’t have HaTov HaMetiv, we would just have left Boneh Yerushalayim and Nodeh Lecha without Melech. But the hachamim said that once we are adding a berachah, and this is a berachah we are adding, we have to mention Melech HaOlam for the berachah itself because it is derabbanan. It is different. Now we might as well find a way to add melech pa'amayim to make up for the two times we did not have melech, because it is not samuch to the others. That is what they thought. Maybe you like it; maybe you don’t.”
“No. If you want to add it, do it yourself, because we have a rule, in the same way as your friend.”
“So you don’t need to add it?”
“So decide. Since they restarted, since they returned to add it because of the good and the good, they might as well. It’s there.”
Now look at the back of your siddur. You should never have to know this, but if you have had a relative who sat shiv'ah (seven-day mourning period) or went to a Beit Avel (mourner’s home), the Birkat Hamazon there is different from the regular Birkat Hamazon. There is a special Birkat Hamazon for those who are avel (mourners). In the back of the siddur, you will find Birkat Hamazon for a Beit Avel. Let’s see—Regine’s is on page 528. You will see Birkat Hamazon la'avelim.
The Birkat Hamazon la'avelim in front of you starts with the regular Birkat Hamazon. First, there is a different zimun (invitation to grace). The language, the nusach of the zimun, is different to mention the menachem avelim (comforter of mourners). Then it says, “Start grace on page 224.” The beginning of Birkat Hamazon is ragil (regular). But when you get to the third berachah, Boneh Yerushalayim, instead of “Rachem Hashem Elokeinu,” we say, “Nachem” (comfort). That changes the berachah of Boneh Yerushalayim. The first two berachot, Birkat HaZan and Birkat Ha'aretz, are unchanged. When you get to the third berachah of Birkat Hamazon, which is about Boneh Yerushalayim and already has a certain sadness because we are talking about rebuilding Yerushalayim, there is already a sense of avelut (mourning). They reword that third berachah to fit the atmosphere, the feelings, the regesh of the Beit Avel. Then there is a new berachah, a new nusach, on page 529. It begins:
“The King who is alive does good and gives good, a God of truth. He judges with righteousness, takes the souls back, rules in His world as He wills, and we are His people and His servants. For everything, we have to give thanks to Hashem and bless Hashem.”
Why do you think we say that? “Al hakol.” The intention is the end of good things and the end of bad things, as they say: just as one blesses for good things that happen, so too one blesses for what appears to be bad, like a person passing away. “Baruch Dayan HaEmet” (Blessed is the true Judge). “Goder peratzot” (mender of breaches): “Hu yigdor et hapirtsah hazot me'alenu.” What is goder peratzot? He fences the breach. If a fence has a hole in it, that is called a pirtsah. Goder comes from geder (fence): to close up the opening, the petach. “Goder peratzot, hu yigdor et hapirtsah hazot me'alenu.” When a person loses a relative, echad mehamishpachah shelo niftar (one of his relatives passes away), he feels there is a breach in his heart, a gap, an opening. The fence of his heart is broken. So we say that Hashem should be goder, should give them nechamah (consolation), and close the opening in his heart. That is the special berachah, the special Birkat Hamazon for an avel. This comes from the Gemara at the bottom of page 3. I will read through it quickly now that you have it—we have a lot of, a lot of genius.
“But how do I know from parutz, parutz means the open parts, and omed means the wall parts?”
“Yeah.”
Remember, we were asking whether the berachah of HaTov VeHaMetiv is from the Torah or from the rabbis. The Gemara in Berachot says that Rav Nachman—he is Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak—claims that HaTov VeHaMetiv must be derabbanan. Why? Because you can change it. If it is de'oraita, how can you change the berachah? How can you change its wording? He says, “You should know that HaTov VeHaMetiv lav de'oraita”—it’s not from the Torah. We uproot it; we erase the berachah in the house of the avel.
Stella is looking at me with a big expression, saying, “What are you talking about? We erase it? You just read it, Rabbi.” So they ask, “What do they say in the Beit Avel?” They say—Rabbi Akiva says, “No, we change it.” You will notice that the words are still there. In addition, you have “Shofet betzedek, Dayan shalit be'olamo,” et cetera. All of that is Dayan HaEmet. Because we know it is a berachah from the rabbis, we can change it. Who says it is the opposite? They change it, so it means it is from the rabbis. Maybe we change it because we know it is from the rabbis. Why? It goes both ways. You cannot change a blessing from the Torah. You cannot prove your opinion with the thing itself. You are saying that because we change it, it means it is from the Torah. But maybe there is another proof that it is from the Torah, and the Jews changed it. Do you understand my question?
“Yes. What comes first? If they are changing it, maybe they have another reason and know it is derabbanan.”
“They are changing it. Maybe what they are saying is that at the same time the hachamim made the berachah of the good and the bad, they also made a special berachah, the makbil, that is also that. So you see they made it at the same time. That is what it means.”
The Gemara then tells a story about a rabbi named Mar Zutra, who went to the house of Rav Ashi. “Itra be-milta” (a matter occurred). What does itra be-milta mean? Something happened to one of his family members. Somebody passed away. It is a nice way of saying a matter happened to him. So he began and said the berachah: “HaTov HaMetiv, El emet, Dayan emet, Shofet betzedek, lokeach bemishpat, veshalit be'olamo, la'asot bo kirtzono, ki chol derachav mishpat” (God of truth, true Judge; Judge with righteousness, take by judgment, rule in His world as He wills, for all His ways are just). You hear the words, “La'asot bo kirtzono, ki chol derachav mishpat”—all His ways are just. You see almost exactly the same words that we read in our siddur, in the Birkat Hamazon for an avel.
“You’re not happy? Why don’t you like it? You didn’t explain why.”
“Why do they say it is missing if it isn’t missing?”
“No, they’re saying it isn’t missing. They’re saying it’s added. When the Gemara says, ‘Oh, we don’t say okrinan tovi mekomo,’ it doesn’t mean that. It means they really added to it, to make it extra. That is the maskana (conclusion) of the Gemara: it is derabbanan. Yes, that is where we are going. All these proofs come from the fact that it is derabbanan. Here is one last idea about HaTov VeHaMetiv that also shows it is derabbanan. This could also answer Yael’s question: they knew all these other halachot that already showed it was derabbanan, which is why they ended up changing it.”
There is something very interesting about the third berachah of Birkat Hamazon, the berachah shelishit (third blessing). Go to page 229. “Vetivnei Yerushalayim irach bimherah beyameinu” (May Jerusalem be rebuilt speedily in our days). “Baruch Atah Hashem.” There are a few different wordings, two different nuschaot of the berachah. We used to say just “Boneh Yerushalayim.” Now they say, “Boneh berachamav Yerushalayim.” That is not what I care about. What do you see at the end? It says, “Belachash amen” (quietly). Who says amen? We do, whoever is reciting it.
“Whoever is saying Birkat Hamazon, the mevarech, answers amen to his own berachah.”
Is this a common practice? Is that what it means? Have you practiced this? Are you looking for other examples? Kiddush? No. The first question is: when is it the practice to answer amen to your own berachah? Nobody says, “Baruch Atah Hashem borei peri ha'etz, amen,” and then eats it. You are not allowed to say amen without hearing the berachah from somebody else. There are all different kinds of problems you could have with amen. We will see that the Gemara says answering amen to your own berachah is disgraceful, not good. But there are times we do answer amen, so we will have to figure out when. That is the first question: why do we answer amen to our own berachah? The second question is why we answer amen belachash. What does it mean to say amen quietly? If you answer amen, answer out loud. It is very rare to answer amen to our own berachah, and even rarer to answer amen belachash. Why not answer bekol ram? Why do we need a compromise here?
Let’s look at the Gemara at the end of page 4. One beraita says that if you answer amen to your own berachah, it is praiseworthy, a good thing. But a second beraita says, “Harei ze meguneh” (this is disgraceful). We have a contradiction: one beraita says it is good to answer amen to your own berachah, and the other says not to. One is talking about one case, and the other is talking about every other case. Which one is which? The beraita that says answering amen to your own berachah is good is talking about Boneh Yerushalayim, as we do. The one that says it is not good, that it is meguneh, is talking about she'ar berachot (other blessings).
Before we continue, there is a major machloket about this Boneh Yerushalayim. When the Gemara says you can answer amen to your own berachah, does it mean only Boneh Yerushalayim, or something similar to it as well? What is the main feature of Boneh Yerushalayim? Why would we answer amen to it? Why would it be different from any other berachah? What is it the end of? It is the last blessing in the order of blessings. Whenever you have a series of berachot, one after another in a kvutzah (group), “onim amen achar haberachah ha'acharonah le'atzman” (one answers amen after the final blessing). We answer amen at the end of the final berachah in the series.
Can you think of another example? The Amidah. You all do it: you answer amen to your own berachah at Sim Shalom (Grant peace). Why? Sim Shalom is the last berachah. Whenever there is a series of berachot connected to each other, you answer amen at the last one. You are essentially answering amen to the whole group and signaling that you have reached the end. There is another example you say every day: Baruch she'amar veYishtabach (Blessed is He who spoke, and may He be praised). These are berachot connected to each other. What do we say at the end of Yishtabach? “Melech gadol umhulal batishbachot. Elohei olam, Elohei olam.” But that is not belachash. Boneh Yerushalayim is the only one said belachash. We will see that at the end of the Gemara. First, understand the idea: whenever you have a series, a group of berachot, at the last one you answer amen to your own berachah, signaling the end and answering amen to the whole series.
Now I will answer Yael’s question about Birkot HaShachar (morning blessings). Why are they different? Even though we say Birkot HaShachar together, really each berachah belongs to a different action. The Gemara says that when you wake up in the morning, you say netilat yadayim (washing of the hands); when you put on your belt and your clothes, “malbish arumim” (clothes the naked); when you open your eyes, and so on. They did not do it this way. Later, the hachamim changed it. After the Gemara’s ruling, they said it was very difficult to say each thing separately, and they decided to bless together throughout the day. But these were not established as a series of connected blessings. Each berachah was meant to be said individually. That is why every berachah begins with “Baruch Atah Hashem.” It does not fit the usual rule of berachah semuchah lechaverta, because each one was meant to be said on its own. The rabbis’ later decision to put them together was, so to speak, a later invention.
There was a big machloket: when the Gemara says Boneh Yerushalayim, does it mean only that berachah, or things like it? We rule that it includes things like Boneh Yerushalayim. I will give you one more example; it is a little controversial. There is a machloket about the berachot a person makes on the haftarah (prophetic reading). Next time you are in the Beit Knesset (synagogue), pay attention when they say the haftarah, the Navi (Prophets) portion after Kriyat HaTorah (Torah reading). There are a number of berachot. You can see them in the Kol Yaakov, around pages 280 to 288. Here are some of them: “Ha'El hane'eman bechol devarav, mesame'ach Tziyon bevanim, magen David, mekadesh haShabbat” (God is faithful in all His words, gladdens Zion with her children, shield of David, sanctifier of Shabbat), or “mekadesh hazemanim.” In the Kol Yaakov, it does not say amen at the end, but other siddurim put amen there. Many people say amen at the end of the birkat haftarah because it is a series.
Why do we say amen to Boneh Yerushalayim quietly? I will tell you why. When Abaye would say amen to Boneh Yerushalayim, he said it out loud. We have a rule about po'alim (workers). Workers have different rules concerning tefillah and berachot because they are working. What does that mean? They do not have time. The hachamim were very careful that workers should not say any berachah they are not absolutely required to say, so they would not take time away from their ba'al habayit (employer). For example, the hachamim said that a worker who is up in a tree and says the Shema (the Shema prayer) does not have to come down, because that would waste his time. We make special rules for workers so they do not take time away from their employer.
Abaye said amen out loud at the end of Birkat Boneh Yerushalayim. Why? So the workers would hear it. Then the workers would stop their Birkat Hamazon. Workers did not have to say HaTov HaMetiv. That is another proof that the first three berachot are de'oraita, so workers are obligated to say them, but HaTov HaMetiv is derabbanan. When the hachamim established HaTov HaMetiv, they established that a worker does not say it. Why? The rabbis’ addition should not take time away from a worker for his employer. You can tell me, “Rabbi, it takes only a couple of minutes to say.” Even a couple of minutes. Imagine what the hachamim would do if it were social media, WhatsApp, and people using their phones during work. Forget about it; they would go crazy.
“Nachon, exactly.”
So Abaye said amen out loud, “bishvilchem, bishvilchem,” for you, to signal to the workers, “Siyum Birkat Hamazon, al tamshichu”—Birkat Hamazon is finished; do not continue.
Rav Ashi would answer amen silently. He was worried: “What will happen? Everyone will answer amen to the blessing of Jerusalem. If you answer amen to the blessing, that signals that you are at the end. Everyone will say, ‘Good, I’m at the blessing of Jerusalem. I’ll see you later, goodbye.’ They’re going to dismiss; they’re going to skedaddle.” Rav Ashi said that, on the one hand, you have to say amen to make the distinction. On the other hand, if I say it out loud, people will start skedaddling. So we say amen, but quietly. This way people give the proper respect to the berachah of the good. “Good” means they might dismiss and treat it disrespectfully. I don’t know if they say that there are short blessings that are easy to say, but they have to say them, like a berachah on food. But with Birkat Hamazon, once they have fulfilled it, the hachamim established that they do not have to say it.
“There is only one where it is amen because it is the only one with a blessing after.”
“Exactly. Because of the blessing after the ending, which does not happen anywhere else. That is why it is unique. It is the only one where we answer amen silently. Every other time we answer—workers only say the first three, but everyone else says the whole thing. That is how the Shulchan Aruch rules at the end here. We do not have to read it, because we are all there. It is exactly what we just said. That is the halachah lema'aseh (practical ruling).”
We have dissected HaTov HaMetiv. We saw where it comes from, why the hachamim added it to Birkat Hamazon, and whether it is de'oraita or derabbanan. We discussed the nafka minah—the halachic ramifications of its being de'oraita or derabbanan. We saw multiple proofs that it is derabbanan, and how that affects the nusach, the changes in the Beit Avel, and the way we answer amen to Birkat Boneh Yerushalayim. All of that is discussed in the sources we read. Questions?
“We said this at the beginning. I’m trying to remember: why did the rabbis add more?”
“Because the Beit HaMikdash was destroyed.”
“Because of the fall of Beit A?”
“Because they wanted to give thanks to Hashem for what happened in the miracle at Beitar.”
“Oh, okay. But originally it was just the first three.”
“It was just the first three. Correct.”
“What about the Harachamans?”
“Rabbi Eliezer Melamed says the following: ‘Once we already had the kedushah (holiness) of the mitzvah (commandment) of Birkat Hamazon, nahagu Yisrael lehosif bakashot ishiot shepotchim baHarachaman (Israel customarily added personal requests beginning with Harachaman).’ They took advantage of the opportunity to add personal things. Just as in the Amidah we add personal things, we add personal things and other prayers, including public prayers. Even if it is not a restoration of the sages, you can add whatever you want. You can add the blessing of the Lord; you can add the blessing of chatan and kallah (bridegroom and bride).”
“Can I add it in my own words?”
“Yes, for sure. Really, like in the name of God, like in the name of God, the mercy is like this. Add—yeah. ‘Every knowledge according to the way.’”
“If a person needs to stop speaking or go—say a person is stressed, has an appointment, is in a rush, and can’t wait two more minutes to say all the mercies—can he stop speaking? Not skip it entirely, but stop and fill it in later?”
“He says that if a person needs to stop talking or walking, when he finishes the fourth berachah he can stop. Then, when he can, he can add what comes afterward. You don’t always want to do that. We are saying that if a person is in a pressured situation where he has to speak or run, he can run and do what he needs to do, and then, when he has a calm minute, repeat the Harachamans if he needs to.”
“I guarantee the Harachamans are not in the short version.”
“If you don’t know about it, you’re better off.”
“There’s a discussion that the Ben Ish Chai wrote a short version of Birkat Hamazon. He writes that people who don’t learn don’t know how to read; they are ignorant. He also says for people—which is really true for the most part—‘I don’t know what I can learn from the babies when I get scared to eat.’ I don’t know. That’s why I’m here.”
“No, also, in the past, only 100 years ago, women taught in a yeshiva and taught how to read, and that. For the majority, for most of Jewish history, women didn’t know. They didn’t know how to read and pray. So they found something they could do.”
“Okay, you feel good about it, but, you know.”
“I want to know what the short version is, because a lot of times—”
“We can find it. I have to find the short version. They have it in wallet size for people to keep and use when necessary. It has all four berachot, but they are basically—each berachah has only the basic idea. I think it is still four berachot. It is not like Me'en Shalosh, where they combine it into one berachah; each berachah is just brief. Like, instead of—”
“Would you say that, when the kids are like, things are crazy, and I really can’t say it, I could still do these four?”
“I tried, I think.”
“Yes, then you can say it. You should try it. They say 72 minutes, but it is not accurate; it is not so precise. They say that if you have 72 minutes after you eat, you can still say it. It is not really 72 minutes. They say that because they estimate that a person loses weight after 72 minutes. If a person ate a big meal and two hours later feels fine, when you feel a little hungry, that’s it.”