Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

See Chapter 1, Halachah 2.

As a source for this practice, Berachot 43b quotes Psalms 150:6: “All souls shall praise God,” and asks: “From what does a soul benefit? Fragrance.”

See Hilchot Klei HaMikdash 1:3.

Just as the blessing shehakol includes all types of foods, this blessing includes all types of fragrances.

The motivating principle is that one should recite the blessing before benefiting from the fragrance. Nevertheless, there should not be an extended period between the time the blessing is recited and the time one receives the benefit (Mishnah Berurah 216:47-48).

Although the substance must be burned before it produces its fragrance, it still retains its initial blessing (Mishnah Berurah 216:49).

Since this oil was produced primarily in Eretz Yisrael, our Sages ordained a special blessing for it (Rabbenu Yonah, based on Berachot 43a).

This ruling is based on the Rambam’s interpretation of Berachot 43a. Other commentaries interpret the passage differently.

The expression “as was done for the anointing oil” cannot mean copying the formula for the incense oil, since that is forbidden (Klei HaMikdash 1:4). Rather, the intent is preparing oil in a manner resembling the incense oil.

This ruling has raised many questions. Some authorities suggest that the Rambam’s version of Berachot 43b differs from the text we presently possess. The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 216:11), however, quotes the Rambam’s decision with the proviso that the blessing required for the oil must be the same as that required for the myrtle.

Similarly, if one also had spices from an animal, one should recite a third blessing. Nevertheless, after the fact, if a person recited only one blessing, “... Who created various kinds of spices,” with the intent of including all these fragrances, he is considered to have fulfilled his obligation (Shulchan Aruch and Rama, Orach Chayim 216:10). There is no required order of priority for these blessings. Rather, whichever spice one desires to smell more should be given precedence.

Note the explanation of this halachah in the commentary on Chapter 7, Halachah 14, Notes 34-36. The repetition of these concepts is necessary because one might think that the laws mentioned previously apply only regarding grace, when reciting the blessings over a cup of wine enhances their importance. Here, the Rambam is stating a general principle: that blessings over food should be recited before blessings over fragrance (Kinat Eliyahu).

Unlike the parallels in the blessings over food, the blessing “... Who created fragrant herbs” cannot take the place of the blessing “... Who created fragrant trees.”

Berachot 53a explains that although one is required to recite a blessing only on fragrances that were prepared for people to smell (see Halachot 7-8), one should recite a blessing in this situation. Although the perfumer prepares his fragrances with the intent that people purchase them, he also has in mind that they smell them so that they will desire to purchase them.

In this instance, the person is not smelling each fragrance individually, but all of them collectively. Hence, he recites one all-inclusive blessing instead of reciting an individual blessing for each fragrance, as stated in the previous halachah (Mishnah Berurah 217:3).

The Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chayim 217:1) states that if one left with the intent of returning, a second blessing should not be recited.

Our translation is based on Rav Kapach’s interpretation of the Rambam’s Commentary on the Mishnah, Kilayim 5:8. Although there are difficulties with this interpretation, we have employed it because of the obvious problem in translating the word שושנה. As the Kessef Mishneh mentions, both שושנה and ורד are generally translated as “rose.” Since the Rambam mentions both these terms in the same halachah, an alternate translation for one of the terms is necessary.

This translation is based on the Targum Yonatan’s rendition of Song of Songs 2:1.

Even though the fragrance is produced by cooking the rose petals in water, since the source of the fragrance is the rose, the blessing remains the same (Magen Avraham 216:7).

Not only is one not required to recite a blessing in such a situation, it is forbidden to do so. Examples of all three categories are mentioned in the following halachah.

It is forbidden to derive any benefit from false gods or anything that was consecrated to their service (Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:2).

This prohibition was instituted lest one be aroused to engage in sexual activity (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 217:4); alternatively, to prevent sexual thoughts from arising (Mishnah Berurah 217:16).

It was customary in Talmudic times to rinse one’s hands with fragrant oil after eating (Berachot 53a, b). The Mishnah Berurah 217:11 applies the same concept to oil used as a body deodorant.

Berachot 53a states that a person who walks through the streets of Tiberias on the Sabbath eve should not recite a blessing despite the fragrant odor he smells, because the fragrance comes from clothes being perfumed in honor of the Sabbath.

Note the Mishnah Berurah 217:14 who states that if the person also intends to enjoy the aroma of the incense he must recite a blessing, even when his primary intent was to perfume the clothes.

On the basis of this law, the commentaries question the Rambam’s statements in Halachah 3 regarding oil perfumed with spices in a manner resembling the anointing oil. Nevertheless, the difficulty can be resolved on the basis of the Rambam’s description of the preparation of the anointment oil (Hilchot Klei HaMikdash 1:2, quoted in the notes to Halachah 3, Note 9). Since the spices were “soaked in... water until all their power was expressed,” it is considered as if the essence of the ingredients is contained in the fragrance. In contrast, clothes perfumed by incense never collected the essence of the incense’s fragrance (Bayit Chadash, Orach Chayim 216).

This does not necessarily apply at present, when many gentiles are no longer idolaters.

Because we assume that it is associated with idol worship.

The Ma’aseh Rokeach and the Yad HaMelech argue whether this applies to a mixture of a permitted fragrance with a fragrance associated with idol worship. Since the existence of an article connected with idol worship never becomes nullified even when mixed with 1000 times more than its substance (Hilchot Avodat Kochavim 7:9), it is forbidden to smell this mixture of fragrances. On the other hand, one can argue that this principle does not apply in this instance. Here, it is only fragrance and not an article of substance that has been mixed together. Hence, the concept of nullification can be applied, and the fragrance from the mixture is permitted.