Q&A: A Blessing Adjacent to Another Blessing
A Blessing Adjacent to Another Blessing
Question
Greetings and blessings,
To the honored gaon Rabbi M. A.
In the Tur (Orach Chayim, sec. 110) he cites a dispute among the medieval authorities as to whether the blessing of the Traveler’s Prayer must be adjacent to another blessing. Rabbeinu Yonah’s view is that since, in the Amidah, the blessing “Who hears prayer” is adjacent to another blessing, therefore here too, in the Traveler’s Prayer, even if it is not adjacent to another blessing, we are not concerned about that, since in its proper place it is adjacent to another blessing. And similarly regarding the blessing “Everlasting love” when one recites it by itself next to the Shema. And the basic principle underlying his view would seem to be that the rule that a blessing must either begin with “Blessed are You” or be adjacent to another blessing is a rule about the essential formulation of the blessing in its proper place; but when one says that same blessing out of its proper place, we are not concerned that he is saying it without its being adjacent to another blessing. However, we also see from Rabbeinu Yonah that the Traveler’s Prayer is the same blessing as “Who hears prayer” in the Eighteen Blessings, and if so it is not a new blessing-formulation, because the blessing “Hear our voice” includes all requests, as the Tur writes (there, sec. 119). Therefore they said in Avodah Zarah 8a that a person asks for his needs in “Who hears prayer,” and the primary formulation of this blessing was instituted as part of the order of the Eighteen Blessings. This matter requires further analysis.
With abundant blessings,
A good year
Answer
It seems to me that we corresponded about this, didn’t we?
I didn’t understand why what you wrote is an explanation. You’re only repeating the Tur’s words that being adjacent to another blessing is a rule concerning the blessing in its proper place, not every blessing as such.
I thought of a different formulation that might serve as a kind of explanation: the rule of adjacency to another blessing is not a rule in the blessing itself, but in the place of the blessing. One does not position a blessing except in a way that makes it adjacent to another blessing. Therefore, when one recites an unplaced blessing (not in its proper place, and really with no place at all), there is no rule of adjacency to another blessing.
True, it is easier to say this regarding the Traveler’s Prayer, since it really is an occasional blessing that was not instituted within any formal framework, and in fact it has no fixed place (like blessings over enjoyment or over seeing something). But regarding “Everlasting love,” it does have a defined place, and it seems that there the reasoning is less applicable.
And perhaps when one says it by itself, that is as though it has no place (a blessing standing alone cannot be adjacent to another blessing). Another possibility is that from the perspective of the blessing over Torah study, in that context it is a blessing with no place. Its place is within the framework of its being a blessing of the Shema.
Discussion on Answer
In my opinion, it is בהחלט possible to teach only religious studies, and in the last year or two make up the secular studies. In any case, school is a waste of time. But some teenagers just aren’t built for that.
Indeed, we did correspond — I forgot. Very nice!
By the way, they asked me and I’m not sufficiently immersed in the matter, so I’ll leave it to your honor to rule.
“In a yeshiva high school, is it proper to have general high-school studies, or should there be as much Torah as possible specifically at that age?”