Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 215 - Responding Amen After Blessings

Berachos 45b.

With the exception of the recitation of Amen after the third blessing of Grace, as explained in sec. 188:1.

With the exception of the recitation of Amen after the third blessing of Grace, as explained in sec. 188:1.

In contrast to ordinary conversation, the verses of praise that constitute Pesukei D’Zimra are not considered an interruption between the two blessings.

Berachos 51b.

I.e., detached from the blessing to which one is responding.

As mentioned there, this leniency applies only when one is not obligated in the blessing to which he responds. Support for this ruling is taken from the custom practiced in the Great Synagogue of Alexandria in ancient Egypt (see Sukkah 51b). That synagogue was so huge that people sitting too far back to hear the sheliach tzibbur would know when to answer Amen only by keeping an eye on the flag that was waved as a sign. (See sec. 57:2).

In a similar vein, Rambam writes (Hilchos Melachim 10:10): “We should not prevent a non-Jew who desires to perform one of the Torah’s mitzvos… [provided] he performs it as required.”

Lest the non-Jew include an acknowledgement of powers other than G‑d.

See Chulin 6a. See also sec. 199, footnote 3.

Our translation follows the definition of the term min given by the Alter Rebbe here. In other sources (e.g., Rambam, Hilchos Teshuvah 3:7), the term is defined differently. The above rule applies whether the min is Jewish or not.

Since a person who alters the wording of a blessing coined by our Sages does not fulfill his obligation, it is improper to respond Amen.

Berachos 53b.

In such an instance, not only the child, but also the adult teaching him, may recite G‑d’s name.

It goes without saying that a child is permitted to recite blessings — and an adult may recite G‑d’s name when teaching him — when the child is obligated to do so, e.g., before and after eating, as part of the process of being trained in the observance of mitzvos. See sec. 167:23, sec. 190:4, and sec. 484:4.

In this ruling, the Alter Rebbe deviates from his source (Magen Avraham 215:5), who speaks only about the prohibition against an adult mentioning G‑d’s name when reading a blessing while studying the Talmud or the like. The Alter Rebbe emphasizes that it is forbidden for an adult to mention G‑d’s name even when studying the blessings themselves at a time when he is not obligated to recite them. Conversely, when an adult is obligated to recite a blessing, but does not know how to recite it, another person may prompt him word-for-word, including the utterance of G‑d’s name (see sec. 484:4 and footnote 22 to sec. 213). Indeed, it is for this reason — that he can be taught at a time when he is obligated to recite them — that an adult cannot be taught to recite the blessings at a time when he is not obligated to recite them. In contrast, there is never a time when a child is obligated to recite the blessings. Therefore, there is no advantage to teaching him at one time over another (the Rebbe’s Igros Kodesh, Vol. 3, Letter no. 503).

Indeed, when reciting blessings at such a time, a child may fulfill the obligations of an adult. See sec. 186:3, et al.

E.g., when he recites a blessing over food or the like.

See sec. 284:8.

Berachos 33a; see sec. 167:12.

See sec. 156:2, where the Alter Rebbe, referring to Nedarim 7b, states: “One should be careful not to mention G‑d’s name in vain, for wherever the Divine name is uttered freely [and without need], death or poverty abound.” As mentioned in sec. 85:3, it is forbidden to use G‑d’s name in vain even when speaking in other languages. For that reason, rather than use the term G‑d, people often use other appellations, such as (in the Holy Tongue) HaShem — literally, “the [Divine] name,”) and (in Yiddish) der Eibershter — literally, “the One Above,” or der Bashefer — literally, “the Creator”).

Taking a false oath is considered a very severe sin, as reflected in the admonition given to a litigant before taking an oath. To quote — and that only in part — the severe statements of Rambam (Hilchos Sh’vuos 11:16):

We tell him: Know that the entire world trembled at the time the Holy One, blessed be He, told Moshe [Shmos 20:7]: “Do not take the name of G‑d, your L‑rd, in vain.” For with regard to all the [other] Scriptural transgressions, [ibid., 34:7] states: “And He shall cleanse.” However, with regard to [a false oath,] [ibid.] states: “[G‑d] will not cleanse one who takes His name in vain.”

With regard to all the transgressions in the Torah, retribution is exacted from him [alone], but with regard to [a false oath], retribution is exacted from him and from his family who conceal the matter for him. Moreover, this causes retribution to be exacted from “the enemies of the Jews,” for the entire Jewish people are responsible for each other.”

E.g., when expressing thanks for good fortune or the like. In that vein, sec. 156:2 mentions that our Sages (Berachos 9:5) granted license to mention G‑d’s name when greeting a friend.

To illustrate this principle: As stated in sec. 25:13, according to some opinions, putting on the arm tefillin and the head tefillin are covered by the same blessing. Under ordinary circumstances, it is forbidden to make an interruption between putting on the two tefillin and thus require the recitation of the second blessing.

See sec. 46:1 regarding the obligation to recite 100 blessings every day. As explained there, on Shabbos, only seven blessings are recited in the Shemoneh Esreh, as opposed to the 19 recited on a weekday. Hence, there is a need to compensate by reciting other blessings.

E.g., two types of fruit that are both covered by the blessing Borei pri haetz.

E.g., one eats a fruit to offset the sharp taste of whiskey, in which instance, the fruit is covered by the blessing Shehakol nih’yah bidvaro recited over the whiskey, although it is not specific for it.

Needless to say, he will also be required to recite a blessing before partaking of them.

This section is not extant in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch. See Seder Birkas HaNehenin, ch. 1, law 17, which explains similar concepts.

They object to delaying partaking of the fruit until after the recitation of Grace, since this causes additional blessings to be recited unnecessarily.

Generally, the Rabbis follow the approach that whenever a question regarding the recitation of a blessing arises, we rule leniently and do not require the recitation of the blessing, lest its recitation be in vain. In this instance, however, it is recommended that the person delay partaking of the fruit and thus recite an additional two blessings despite the opinions that it is unnecessary to do so.

See the Kuntreis Acharon (note 4) to sec. 249, where the Alter Rebbe elaborates in support of this position, quoting many authorities who support this opinion and provides ample justification for their position.

See sec. 284:7 and sec. 290:1.

These lines were not written by the Alter Rebbe himself, but added by the printers of his Shulchan Aruch. In fact, the text as extant does not include the entire text of the first part of the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim, or even all the sections that deal with the recitation of blessings. Details regarding much of the subject matter found in the Shulchan Aruch of Rav Yosef Caro, sections 216–229, can be found in the Alter Rebbe’s Seder Birkas HaNehenin, chs. 11–13.