All right, my gentlemen, the question was asked about Al Hamichyah (After the meal). The ruling here is that, for some reason, in Birkat Me'ein Shalosh (Blessing of threefold summary), we do not mention Chanukah (Festival of Dedication) and Purim. Why don’t we say Al Hanisim (For the miracles) in Me'ein Shalosh? That’s the question. The Rav discusses it here.
He writes: “Aside from this matter, that Chanukah and Purim are not mentioned in Birkat Me'ein Shalosh, Rav Chaim HaLevi, the Brisker—great-grandpa from Brisk—raised another question in Ner Tziyon, page 559, concerning Birkat Me'ein Shalosh: Why do we mention Shabbat and Yom Tov (Festival day) after mentioning the building of Jerusalem, before ‘for You are good’?”
The question is that the Shabbat addition in Me'ein Shalosh is placed before “for You are good and do good.” After “Rachem (Have mercy) on us, Hashem, our God, and on Israel Your people, and on Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) Your city, and on Your altar, and build Jerusalem, the holy city,” it says, “Build Jerusalem, the holy city, speedily in our days; bring us there, make us rejoice in its rebuilding, and let us eat of its fruit and be satisfied with its goodness; Retzei VeHachalitzenu (Favor us and strengthen us) on this Shabbat day; for You are good and do good.” “Build Jerusalem” corresponds to the blessing for rebuilding Jerusalem.
If Me'ein Shalosh corresponds to the berachot of Birkat Hamazon (Grace after meals), then the Shabbat addition is in the wrong place. The addition of “favor us and strengthen us” should come after “Have mercy,” before Jerusalem. All those additions should be there. If you’re including Retzei VeHachalitzenu, it was before the blessing for building Jerusalem. If you’re including Ya'aleh Veyavo (May it rise and come) for Rosh Chodesh (New month), that should also be before the blessing for building Jerusalem.
Why is it called Me'ein Shalosh? It’s not called Al Hamichyah, Al Ha'etz, and Al Peri Hagefen. The name Me'ein Shalosh tells you that it reflects the berachot of Birkat Hamazon. So Rav Chaim asks: If everything is modeled on Birkat Hamazon, why are we putting the addition in the wrong place? In Birkat Hamazon, the place for mentioning Shabbat and Yom Tov is before the conclusion of the blessing for building Jerusalem.
There is another difficulty. The Rambam appears to say that in Birkat Me'ein Shalosh, we mention only Shabbat and Yom Tov; he does not mention Rosh Chodesh. In Hilchot Berachot (Laws of blessings), the Rambam says to mention Shabbat and Yom Tov in Me'ein Shalosh. He lists the additions, but when it comes to Rosh Chodesh, he does not say there is an addition. We have one: “Remember us for good on this Rosh Chodesh day.” But the Rambam does not include it. Why? He says a major new insight.
Rav Chaim HaLevi explains this in the name of the Aruch LaNer, based on what the students of Rabbeinu Yonah say in tractate Berachot. The Rishonim already discuss why Havdalah (Separation) is not mentioned in the prayer of Havinenu (one-line from each blessing). Havinenu is called a tefilah ketzarah (Short prayer). If a person cannot pray the full Amidah (Standing prayer), he can say Havinenu, which has a one-line version of each blessing.
The Gemara says not to pray Havinenu during the winter, when we say Barech Aleinu (Bless us), or on Motza'ei Shabbat. Why not say Havinenu on Motza'ei Shabbat? Because you would have to include Atah Chonantanu (You have granted us understanding). “So include Atah Chonantanu.” No, you can’t include it. Why not, when you include all the other blessings? Rabbeinu Yonah says that Havdalah is not an independent blessing; it is included in Chonen haDa'at (Gracious giver of knowledge). If they included a summary of Havdalah in Havinenu, it would look as though Havdalah were an independent blessing.
We do not rule like Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer. The Mishnah says that Rabbi Akiva says to say Havdalah as an independent blessing, Rabbi Eliezer says to include it in Chonen haDa'at, and Rabbi Eliezer also says to include it in Modim (We give thanks). Rabbi Akiva’s position is that Atah Chonantanu gets its own blessing. We rule like Chachamim (Sages), that Havdalah is included in Chonen haDa'at. Rabbeinu Yonah’s point is that if you put a special line for Atah Chonantanu in Havinenu, people will think it warrants its own blessing, because the other one-line summaries in Havinenu correspond to separate blessings. They might then say, in a regular Amidah, “Blessed are You, Hashem, who distinguishes between the holy and the ordinary” in the middle of the prayer.
Rav Chaim HaLevi derives a principle from this: in a condensed blessing, we include only matters that have an independent blessing. Since Havdalah is not an independent blessing, but is included in Atah Chonen, it cannot be included in Havinenu. On this basis, he says the same applies to Birkat Me'ein Shalosh. What is Me'ein Shalosh? It is a summary of three blessings. It includes only matters that have an independent blessing.
That explains why Retzei VeHachalitzenu and Ya'aleh Veyavo are included: they are additions for which the Sages established an independent blessing. What is the ruling if someone forgot Retzei VeHachalitzenu on Shabbat? There is a separate blessing: “Blessed are You, Hashem, our God, King of the universe, who gave Shabbatot and festivals to Israel as a sign and a covenant.” He can say it after concluding the blessing for building Jerusalem. The text says that if he forgot to say it in its place and remembered after concluding “Boneh Yerushalayim,” he should say the supplementary blessing. Since Retzei VeHachalitzenu has a separate blessing if it was forgotten, it is included in Me'ein Shalosh. And where do you say it if you forgot it? After Boneh Yerushalayim. They put it exactly where it belongs, because that is where its separate blessing is.
The Sages’ rule is that we include only matters that have an independent blessing, as we learned from Rabbeinu Yonah about Havinenu. We are not following the place where the words Retzei VeHachalitzenu appear in the full text; we are following the place of its separate blessing. Since that blessing comes after “Build Jerusalem,” the Shabbat addition in Me'ein Shalosh comes after the Jerusalem section. That is Rav Chaim HaLevi’s remarkable insight.
Chanukah and Purim are different. If you forgot Al Hanisim, you do nothing. Since Al Hanisim is not an independent blessing, it is not included in Me'ein Shalosh. For the same reason, it is not included in the abbreviated prayer. The place for mentioning Shabbat and Yom Tov in Me'ein Shalosh is before “Who is good and does good,” after the Jerusalem section. That is different from Birkat Hamazon itself, because that is where the blessing belongs. This also explains the Rambam’s position: since he holds that if someone forgot Ya'aleh Veyavo on Rosh Chodesh, he does not repeat it, he does not include it in Me'ein Shalosh.
We know that already. By the way, what does the siddur say about Rosh Chodesh in Birkat Hamazon? If you forgot Ya'aleh Veyavo on an ordinary Rosh Chodesh, what does it say? On page 521, it says that if you forgot it at night and remembered after concluding Boneh Yerushalayim, say, “Blessed is He who gave new months to His people Israel as a remembrance.” Notice that it does not include Hashem’s name in that blessing. Why? The Rishonim disagree about whether Rosh Chodesh should have its own blessing.
That explains the Rambam. He held that you do not add Rosh Chodesh as its own blessing, and therefore he does not add it to Birkat Me'ein Shalosh. His position is consistent: in Me'ein Shalosh, he includes Shabbat and Yom Tov, but not Rosh Chodesh. That answers the question.
Here is another insight. In some synagogues, there is a custom on the nights of Chanukah, especially the first night, for someone to call out “Al Hanisim!” after Kaddish (Sanctification prayer) and before the Amidah in Arvit (Evening prayer). It can sound as though he is saying it in the Amidah, but they do it before the first blessing. Are you allowed to announce it? Is that an hefsek (Interruption)? Are you allowed to announce the occasion after Kaddish so people know what is happening?
Chacham Ben Tzion writes that the prayer leader may announce Al Hanisim in Arvit between Kaddish and the prayer. The Shulchan Aruch (Set table), section 236, says not to speak between Ga'al Yisrael (Who redeemed Israel) and the Arvit prayer. Even those who say the eighteen verses of Yir'u Eineinu (May our eyes see) should not interrupt between Yir'u Eineinu and the prayer. However, what the prayer leader announces about Rosh Chodesh between Kaddish and the Arvit prayer is not an interruption, since it is needed for the prayer.
They had a custom for the prayer leader to announce Rosh Chodesh, followed by “Ya'aleh Veyavo.” The Shulchan Aruch says explicitly that this is not an interruption because it is needed for the prayer. The Mishnah Berurah explains that this is not only about announcing Rosh Chodesh or tal umatar (Dew and rain), where forgetting may require repeating the prayer. Even announcing Al Hanisim is permitted, although forgetting it does not require repeating the prayer, because it is still needed for the prayer.
I might have thought that you announce Ya'aleh Veyavo on Chol Hamo'ed (Intermediate festival days) because forgetting it means you have to repeat the Amidah. On Rosh Chodesh, perhaps you announce it because Rosh Chodesh is a Torah matter. Or you might say, “Ask for dew and rain,” because forgetting that can require repeating the Amidah. But Al Hanisim is rabbinic, and forgetting it does not require repeating the Amidah. The Mishnah Berurah says that does not matter: it is needed for the prayer. The proper Amidah includes Al Hanisim, so the Mishnah Berurah says it may be announced.
Can they call it out in Arvit only? The discussion is different in the morning. The connection between redemption and prayer is more stringent in Shacharit (Morning prayer) than in Arvit. In Minchah (Afternoon prayer), it is less stringent still. One could even sing Ma'oz Tzur after Kaddish at Minchah. Even though one should not interrupt, that is not as serious as the connection between redemption and prayer.
The Shulchan Aruch’s ruling comes from the Rashba. He was asked whether the prayer leader should be stopped from announcing Rosh Chodesh between Kaddish and Arvit, and he answered that it is not appropriate to protest. Anything needed for the prayer is not an interruption. The Gemara gives examples from the blessing over bread: saying “Take and bless” is not an interruption. “Bring the salt” and “feed the animals” are also practical instructions that are needed, and are not interruptions. All the more so, this is genuinely needed for the prayer, so people will not make a mistake. All the more so in Arvit, which is optional.
But what does “see what people do” mean? Are we bringing proof from a group of people who do whatever they want? The Rashba could say this because he knew the minyanim (Prayer quorum) were established, with a community and Sages. When he says, “See what people do,” he means people were praying in an organized setting. Can you bring the same proof today, when every person prays in his basement with 20 20 to 22 guys, without order? There is no order.
This raises an important point about Jewish outlook. Today there is a new phenomenon among the Syrians. Ashkenazim started it 20 years ago, and it was the beginning of their decline; we have caught up with their bad customs. What is it? Shtiblach (Small prayer rooms). Ashkenazim used to have beautiful synagogues, minyanim (Prayer quorum), berov am hadrat melech (In a multitude, the king is glorified), rabbis, and order. Then someone said, “I have a prayer quorum in my basement. Whoever wants to pray Friday night can come here. We won’t have to walk two blocks to the Shul (Synagogue).” Then they were already there, with chairs, and added Shacharit.
Convenience was one reason, but there was a more important reason: they wanted to run away from the rabbi and the establishment. They did not want an establishment, rabbis, rules, and people. “We get out faster” is not the real reason. It is about getting away from the establishment and making prayer more convenient.
This is a problem because the Rashba could rely on what people were doing when the prayer gatherings were established and attended by a community with Sages. Today, can you rely on that when each person prays in his own basement, with no order or system? A person needs a paper from 100 rabbis before deciding to establish a prayer quorum in his house. He may think, “What a merit! I’ll bring the Shechinah (Divine presence) into my house!” On the contrary, the Gemara says that whoever has a synagogue in his city and does not go there is called a bad neighbor. This concerns someone who has a Shul in his city. I understand that as referring to someone who avoids the synagogue because he has made his own synagogue at home. Otherwise, calling someone a bad neighbor for not going to a synagogue would be obvious: someone who wears sha'atnez or eats a cheeseburger would also be called bad. The point is someone who has a synagogue in his city but chooses his own house instead. Bishlama (Granted that), if he had no synagogue nearby, that would be different. But if there is one and he stays away because he says, “I’ll do it in my house,” that is the case being discussed.
There are reasons we did not start building synagogues now. The Gemara already discusses Babylonian synagogues, including Chutzal and Shaf Veyativ (He sat and settled). This is not a new institution. Even if you mean well, you have to be careful: breaking off into separate groups breaks the communal order.
Although my understanding differs from some other rabbis, I am very adamant because Chacham Baruch was adamant against establishing prayer quorums in homes, except, God forbid, for a house of mourning or a case like 22 feet of snow, something that happens once in a Jubilee. We had a quorum in such a case, once every yovel. But the next day, when you went to the synagogue, you could not look Chacham Baruch in the eyes. You could not tell him, “We prayed at home,” because he knew that if everyone did that, there would be no rabbis, no order, no system; everyone would do what seemed right to him. Then there would be no framework of religion. A framework means having a rabbi and a system.
My own position was different when it comes to a synagogue itself: make as many prayer quorums as you want. When I became rabbi on Lawrence Avenue, a man came to me and said he needed to speak to me in person, not on the phone. He arrived with a paper and cleared his throat. I asked what was wrong. He explained that the third Shabbat meal on Motza'ei Shabbat ran late and not everyone attended, and people had to go. I said, “You want to make a separate, faster quorum for Arvit? Do it.” He tried to explain his reasons, but I told him, “Do it. I don’t need to hear the reasons.” If a man has come to the synagogue, I’m not going to punish him for wanting to pray. Let prayer quorums increase in Israel.
The exception is on special Shabbatot, hadrat hadarim, when everyone should be together. For example, someone might suggest making a quick minyan for Purim in the back. When there is a berov am (In a multitude, the king is glorified) situation, the rabbi says we should all pray together, and that is nice. But on an ordinary Motza'ei Shabbat, Shabbat is over. Why hold someone back because he should hear Kaddish and the singing of Havdalah? If he is delayed, he can pray inside and finish five minutes earlier.
In my opinion, every prayer quorum should at least have a rabbi. It is not because people do not know how to pray Arvit. It is about having the right form and setting. When you walk in, this is not shel ben; it is not a bunch of truck drivers getting together on the side of the road and praying at a pit stop. It should be an organized prayer quorum with rabbis. Most of the time, questions do not come up in Arvit; it is about the proper setting.
When I see the Rishonim write this way, it reminds me of what I’m telling you. “See what people do, and no one protested” means that people used to pray in an organized setting, with rabbis. Today, if someone stood up between Kaddish and the Amidah and announced, “The football game is at 6:15 tomorrow,” no one would protest either. They would say, “Well done,” and wish him success in doing mitzvot. We have to be very careful about taking practical jokes that happen in prayer quorums and turning them into halachah.
Even before making a prayer quorum at home, you have to ask. Rabbi Weintraub always told me that before doing something, you should ask not how much good will come from it, but how much harm. The good is easy to calculate: “We have a prayer quorum; we’ll pray and recite Barechu.” But ask how much harm might come from it. Why did we build a synagogue? So each person can go into his own hole and pray?
Even when there is a prayer quorum in the synagogue and the rabbi is not there, it is still a different setting from praying at home. Our synagogue is sensitive to that system; we love it. There are other systems, and they are not good systems. When you pray at home, it is not the same as a synagogue. You do not have the sanctuary and the beauty of a synagogue. The things on the walls create the atmosphere of a synagogue. Halachah says that even if you did not pray with a quorum, you should still pray in a synagogue by yourself. That shows that halachah recognizes the sanctity of a synagogue. A house does not have that same sanctity.
Some people feel that on the Shabbatot when the rabbi says not to make a separate prayer quorum, they should not leave. Thank God, we love the synagogue here. The men spend their day off learning here; they like being here. But the next generation may want to make an early quorum or a pre-early quorum. Do it in the synagogue. I am more tolerant of a special quick Arvit on Friday night if it is still under the roof of a synagogue. But once people start making Friday night prayers at home, eventually they may make Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur at home, because everyone has a grievance about something that happened at the synagogue.
“Establish a regular place for your prayer.” This is not a light matter. The community built synagogues for a reason. Someone may say it is too far to walk. Once, at a wedding, while pictures were being taken at the bride’s house, Leo and I said, “Let’s pray Minchah.” We had permission to pray in a work area in a free zone. A regular person—not you guys—might say, “Chacham Tzion is a dictator; he is afraid of losing control.” That is not what drives this. It may be true of some rabbis, but in this matter the issue is not power. It is that this breaks the form of a community.
When Bet Torah opened, Chacham Ya'akov asked, “What are you doing, opening a new synagogue?” People answered that there were people living on Avenue J. It was a story: “You are splitting the community; you are building another synagogue.” At the time, Shaare Zion was a large synagogue. Over time, everyone understood that it was needed, and it has expanded 10 times already. But people still asked, “What are you doing?” And that was about building a synagogue. All the more so when everyone builds separate prayer quorums. They think it is a merit. Did you ask the town rabbi?
Perhaps they want to leave early, or avoid a ten-minute drive. But do not tell me that a ten-minute drive justifies separating from the tzibbur (Community). “Do not separate yourself from the community.” Unless you are the biggest matmid in the world and could learn two pages of Daf Hayomi in those ten minutes, are you such a matmid that you cannot tolerate it? If you cannot, go to sleep or go to the bathroom. The Levush gives the reason that it is needed for the prayer. That is why announcing Al Hanisim would not be an interruption.
The Magen Avraham (Shield of Abraham) writes that perhaps this applies specifically to Rosh Chodesh, which is a Torah matter, and to the request for rain, where forgetting it requires repeating the prayer. But Chanukah and Purim are not from the Torah, and if one forgets, one does not repeat the prayer; perhaps they should not be announced. You understand the argument: perhaps an announcement needs one of two reasons—it concerns a Torah matter, or forgetting it requires repeating the Amidah. According to that approach, this may also explain why they do not announce “He makes the wind blow and brings down the rain”: if you forgot that but said the corresponding phrase for dew, you are still covered.
Nevertheless, the Magen Avraham concludes that the custom is to announce it, and he quotes the Abudarham. The Mishnah Berurah brings this as well. The Peri Megadim writes that although some say not to interrupt in the matter of “tevol berok,” and there is a tradition to join redemption to prayer, nevertheless it is appropriate to announce something needed for a mitzvah. That is his ruling, and we do not see anyone disagreeing here. So if someone wants to announce Al Hanisim after Kaddish in Arvit, it is possible. The prayer leader—or one of the pointies—may do so.
In Shacharit, however, he should not announce it, because one is required to join redemption to prayer. Look at the Sha'ar Hatziyon (Gate of the Tziyon) on section 236. It says specifically that in Arvit the connection between redemption and prayer is not so stringent, because Arvit is optional, but in Shacharit it is more stringent and it is forbidden to interrupt.
Someone asked whether it would be better to do what we do, raising the voice slightly when reaching the relevant place. That avoids some problems, but some people pray faster and some slower. At least the announcement gives a person warning. Our custom is not to announce even in Arvit, but for the prayer leader or attendant to raise his voice. The main ruling is certainly like the Rashba: it is needed for the prayer. So why change the custom?
Rabbeinu HaAri explains that there is a Kaddish between Hashkiveinu and the eighteen-blessing Arvit prayer, unlike Shacharit, where redemption must be joined directly to prayer. That explains the distinction. Nevertheless, the Kaf Hachayim writes that the custom in Jerusalem is not to announce between redemption and prayer, and perhaps they were concerned about the position of the Maharshal.
The Kaf Hachayim quotes the Maharshal as prohibiting the attendant from announcing between redemption and prayer and directing him to announce during the prayer. The Maharshal’s position is that one does not say the verses during the prayer leader’s Kaddish in Arvit because it would interfere with joining redemption to prayer. Although the Rashba is lenient, the Maharshal disagrees, and the Kaf Hachayim is concerned about his view.
The Ben Ish Chai writes in the first year, parashat Pekudei, section 5: one should not interrupt between the Arvit blessings and the prayer except for Hashkiveinu, Kaddish, and the five responses of amen to Kaddish. As for the cantor’s announcement of Rosh Chodesh between Kaddish and the prayer, there is room to question it, but where the custom is to announce, one should not protest. He also says not to answer amen to the blessing of “Who guards His people Israel.” His point is that he objects to the announcement unless there is a custom to do it.
We do not have a custom to do that; we were thinking of starting one, but he is saying that unless it is already the custom, stay away from it. Chacham Ben Tzion Abba Shaul understood the wording to mean that speaking is prohibited, but answering amen is permitted.
There was a question about announcing that people should remove their tefillin before Mussaf on Rosh Chodesh. That is a separate question about when to remove them. It is better not to talk in the synagogue. It is not that talking between Kaddish and Mussaf is the greatest prohibition; we do not talk because we are in the synagogue.
Kenu Da'at and Rav Palachi discuss answering amen after “Who guards His people Israel.” He writes that one should finish that blessing together with the prayer leader, but if he finishes before the prayer leader, where people answer amen after him, then they answer amen. The Ben Ish Chai said you do not answer amen after Hashkiveinu, but we do answer amen after Hashkiveinu. That is a separate matter. The Ben Ish Chai does not like the Rosh Chodesh announcement, and we do not see that practice in our synagogues. Sometimes one person comes along with his own view, but that does not establish our custom.
So, practically, do not announce it. We began the class by saying to announce it as a mitzvah, and now we have come around. Go back to the old custom; do not change anything. In the Amidah itself, though, say it out loud—that is already a custom.
Here is another case: someone is standing in the silent Amidah and thinks that if he says Al Hanisim, he will miss Kedushah (Holiness) with the community. “Do not pass over a mitzvah.” Do not say, “I’ll skip Al Hanisim, finish the Amidah quickly, and say Nakdishach (We shall sanctify You) with the community.” Even though after the fact forgetting Al Hanisim does not require repeating the prayer, he is not permitted to skip it. That is the order of prayer.
Ohr LeTzion (Light of Zion), part 4, chapter 48, discusses the question: may one skip Al Hanisim in the Amidah to manage to say Kedushah with the community? The answer is no, even though saying Al Hanisim is not essential to the validity of the prayer. One should not skip a passage from the Amidah that the Sages instituted in order to say a Kedushah that is yet to come. The author cites the Tzemach Tzedek (Sprout of righteousness), Sha'ar HaMilu'im, siman 14, ot..., and Rashi in tractate Sukkah (Booth), daf 25, who teach that a mitzvah kalah, a mitzvah that's standing by you now, should not be pushed aside for a more weighty one that will come later.
That is the rule: a mitzvah that is standing by you now, you do now. We learned this from the Radbaz. When a person is released from prison, which day should he leave? Right away. He should not say, “I’ll wait until Yom Kippur.” Do the mitzvah tomorrow; do not pass it by. The author also refers to the view that Kedushah is from the Torah. “I will be sanctified among the children of Israel.” We have it in our book: one should intend to fulfill the mitzvat aseh (Positive commandment) of the Torah, “I will be sanctified.”
Does this apply to the “May it be Your will” passages in some prayer books? Or to Shome'a Tefillah? What if someone forgot Al Hanisim and wants to add it at the end? He can still answer Nakdishach then. I was thinking of a kohen, especially in our case, when I am often the only one. But there is another source, Chesed LaAlafim (Kindness to thousands), section 109.
It discusses someone observing a personal fast who begins the silent prayer together with the prayer leader. He wants to say Aneinu (Answer us) in his Amidah, but the congregation is not saying Aneinu, so they will get ahead of him. If he says Aneinu in Shome'a Tefillah (Hear prayer), he will not be able to say Modim with the prayer leader. The question is whether he may skip Aneinu in its place so he can say Modim with the prayer leader, and then say Aneinu at the end of the Amidah, after “May the words of my mouth be acceptable.” There is an idea of saying Modim with the prayer leader when praying along with him.
Chesed LaAlafim initially connects the question to the rule against passing over mitzvot, but then says it seems better to say Aneinu in its proper place. That is the Sages’ enactment. However, Maharach Palachi, in his work Ru'ach Chayim, rejects the words of Chesed LaAlafim. He considers saying Aneinu less important than not missing Modim and says to leave it for the end.
That is a disagreement between Chesed LaAlafim and Rav Chaim Palachi, and it may bear on our question: should you leave Al Hanisim to say Nakdishach? Rav Chaim Palachi might say that Al Hanisim is not as important as Nakdishach. The Yabi'a Omer discusses this regarding Kedushah and cites the Tzemach Tzedek, whom we just read, proving from Rashi in Sukkah that a person should not push aside a less weighty mitzvah for a more weighty one.
He says that it is permitted to become ritually impure through contact with a dead person during the seven days before Pesach, even though doing so would prevent the person from bringing the Pesach offering, which is a more weighty mitzvah. Rav Ovadia, meanwhile, holds that reciting Kedushah is rabbinic and cites Rishonim who say so. The Ben Ish Chai does not hold that way. Look at the Ben Ish Chai, parashat Terumah (Offering), first year, section 3. He writes that before Nakdishach, a person should intend to fulfill the positive commandment to sanctify God’s name... The Ben Ish Chai holds that Nakdishach is from the Torah, like Rabbeinu HaAri.
So perhaps, according to the Ben Ish Chai, one would skip Al Hanisim, which is rabbinic, for Nakdishach. Rav Chaim Palachi would say to go with the stronger mitzvah, and in this case Nakdishach is stronger. But the Yabi'a Omer cites the view that Kedushah is rabbinic, so they are equal, and there is no reason to change the order of the Amidah.
The point is that the Torah commandment to sanctify God’s name each day is not necessarily fulfilled specifically by answering Kedushah and saying “Holy, holy, holy.” A person is commanded to conduct all his affairs in a way that sanctifies God’s name and to be trustworthy in business. You may fulfill that through Nakdishach, but that does not mean Nakdishach itself is a Torah commandment. So there are different considerations here, including the principle osek b'mitzvah patur min hamitzvah (One engaged in a commandment is exempt from another). His conclusion is not to break the order of the prayer.
Another point: our custom is to say Al Hanisim without a vav in Matatya (Mattathias). Chacham Ovadia says otherwise, but the Kaf Hachayim discusses the spelling of Matatya: our custom is to say it without a vav. The letter tav has a chirik, giving the pronunciation Matitya, rather than Matatya. Kol Yaakov (Voice of Jacob) has Matatya. Those are the different versions.
Last question for today: someone mistakenly said Al Hanisim in the blessing of Retzei and realized in Modim. He thought that was where it went instead of Ya'aleh Veyavo. He said it by heart; that is how mistakes happen. Does he repeat it in its proper place, or has he already said it?
Chayyat writes that someone who mistakenly said Al Hanisim in Retzei and realized in Modim repeats Al Hanisim in its proper place, as the Sages instituted. The Chida asks this in Chaim Sha'al (Chaim asked): if someone mistakenly said Al Hanisim in Avodah and realized while standing at Modim, must he say it again as the Sages instituted? He brings the view of Maharach Abulafia that it must be repeated, with a hint from the case of a prayer leader who mistakenly says Aneinu before the blessing of Go'el Yisrael. Aneinu belongs between Go'el Yisrael and Refa'einu. If the prayer leader said it between Selach Lanu and Hashiveinu, or somewhere else, he must say it again in the proper place.
The Chida writes that although the rabbi concludes that the matter requires further examination, after reviewing the words of the Magen Avraham, it seems that in our case he should repeat it in Modim. If he forgot Al Hanisim entirely and finished the prayer, he does not need to repeat it.
Another good question: if he said Al Hanisim in Retzei and finished the Amidah, is it an interruption, requiring him to repeat the prayer? The Chida says that mentioning an event from another day in an ordinary prayer is not an interruption. If someone said Ya'aleh Veyavo in the Amidah today, does he have to repeat the prayer? According to the Chida, no, although others disagree.
The Chida discusses someone who said Al Hanisim on 15 Adar, on Shushan Purim (Purim of Shushan). He says it is not an interruption. One might argue that the fourteenth and fifteenth are different because Al Hanisim applies to both, but the point is that it is still the wrong day. Shushan Purim here is like a day in the middle of winter. The question is whether the same applies to Ya'aleh Veyavo. Apparently it does. That is the practical ruling.
We are in section 682, subsection 2. The text in Sha'ar Hatziyon says: “After the fact, if he said Al Hanisim in Avodah and completed his prayer, he does not need to repeat it, since saying it out of place is not an interruption.” It cites Petach HaDvir (Entrance of the Dvir). There you have it. We’ll stop here. Blessed is Hashem forever. There are many halachot here, my gentlemen.