Q&A: The Divine Names Intended in the Blessing "Who Performed Miracles"
The Divine Names Intended in the Blessing "Who Performed Miracles"
Question
Hello, and abundant blessings to the honorable great Rabbi Michael Abraham, may he live long and well.
It is known regarding the Divine Name in the blessing “Who performed miracles” on the first night that one should intend the name Adonai spelled out in the Sag form, combined with the simple name El.
And from the second night onward, the name Adonai spelled out in the Mah form, combined with the simple name Adonai, all as arranged in the prayer book of the Rashash; and this is how I have conducted myself ever since I came of age.
But today I was shown in Imrei Yosef (Homily 5), and also in his glosses to Pri Etz Chaim that were recently reprinted, at length based on the words of Shomer Emunim, that since on the first night we establish the Malkhut face-to-face opposite the Netzach-Hod-Yesod of Zeir Anpin by means of the third blessing, this union remains throughout all the days of Hanukkah, and one should not intend this union on the other nights.
What is the Rabbi’s opinion on this issue? Do the words of Shomer Emunim seem correct to him, and how should one conduct oneself?
I would appreciate it, if possible, if you could answer me promptly before the blessing of the second night.
And I remain, with the blessing of "may his Torah be his vocation," the undersigned, Chaim Meir S.
Answer
I have no opinion or expertise at all in this matter. And even if I did, I do not know why my opinion should count for more than the opinions of those between whom I am supposedly being asked to judge.
Discussion on Answer
It seems to me that an intention made conditionally is nonsense. Because the condition itself is a kind of intention. Only an act can be done with a “conditional intention.”
I didn’t answer about that issue because it seemed to me like a provocation (whether in the Ab, Sag, Mah, Ban spellings, or in Mem-Yod, Netzach-Hod-Yesod, or manuscript form). But regarding conditional intention, that is something worth discussing, and it is not at all obvious that it is ineffective. This could be linked to the conditional intention discussed by the Avnei Nezer regarding the afikoman, and this is not the place to elaborate. I also seem to recall that they discussed this in connection with the Bach at the beginning of the laws of sukkah, where he infers from the Tur that one who sits in the sukkah must intend it as a commemoration of historical events. And as is well known, there is a dispute among the Tannaim whether these were clouds of glory or actual booths, so the question arises whether it is possible to intend this conditionally.
However, here we are not dealing with halakhic intention, so the halakhic discussion is not really relevant.
With God's help, 25 Kislev 5778
To Rabbi Chaim Meir S. — greetings,
I would suggest that you direct your question to Rabbi Israel Avichai, head of the Beit-El Yeshivat HaMekubalim (a student of Rabbi Meir Yehuda Getz of blessed memory). His address is 90 Chabad Street, Jerusalem. His phone number appears on the 144 website.
With Hanukkah blessings full of light,
Shimshon Tzvi Lwenger
I just heard from a certain Torah scholar that one should intend it conditionally; that is, to intend this mystical union only on condition that the union of Malkhut and Zeir Anpin from the first night does not continue, but is renewed each night, in accordance with the view of the Rashash.
What does the Rabbi think?