Skip to main content

Thought for the Day: Bracha Upon Seeing Site of Miraculous Event

The Dirshu halacha project, besides delivering a synopsis of the halacha of the day, also occasionally presents interesting thought questions.  The most recent of which was:
The Mishnah Berurah (218:§7) rules that no “She’asah li nes” is recited over the place near Yerushalayim where the angel smote Sancheriv’s encampment because the place does not remind us of the miracle. Even though it may be possible to pinpoint where the miracle happened, since the miracle did not take place with the actual land, the miracle is not recognizable from the location. However, the Shulchan Aruch (218:1) rules that one must recite the blessing when he sees the stone on which Moshe Rabbeinu sat during the war with Amalek. It would seem that this miracle is no more recognizable from its location than the destruction of Sancheiriv’s army.What is the difference between these two cases?  
I can think of four differences:

First, in the case of Sancheiriv’s army, the land itself was not relevant to the miracle.  True, the miracle occurred on land, but it could just as easily have occurred at sea or in the air.  The rock onthat supported Moshe, on the contrary, is specifically mentioned as helping Moshe in his performance of the miracle.  This is similar to the pillar of salt into which Lot's wife was transformed and upon seeing we say the bracha of "dayan ha'emes".  She herself was evil and deserved that punishment, but seeing an actual object that was mentioned as part of the the miraculous way in which Lot was saved -- which was a direct result of his relationship to Avraham Avinu -- is a powerful reminder of how far HaShem's mercy extends.

Second, even though the location of the land can be identified, that is not necessarily the same dirt and rocks that were there when Sancheiriv’s army was miraculously defeated.  The rock that we see today (assuming it could be identified), however, is the same rock on which Moshe sat, even if it may have moved in the interim. Similarly, the bracha of “She’asah li nes” would be recited upon seeing the Well of Miriam, even though it was and is quite mobile.  (R' Chaim Vital relates, in fact, that his rebbie the Ari z"l once took him on a small rowboat to give him a drink from the Well of Miriam in order to help him learn with more clarity.)

Third, Klal Yisrael was not at the time of the miracle fighting a pitched battle with Sancheiriv’s army.  The destruction of Sancheiriv’s army merely removed the threat (rather decisively, to be sure) of planned aggression.  That makes the miracle only a גרמה/cause, but not direct effect.  On the other hand, Klal Yisrael certainly was fighting a pitched with Ameleik and their victory was miraculous.  In fact, as Chazal tell us, it was their looking to their Father in Heaven that won the battle, not their hand to hand combat.  (Something to seriously ponder when considering how to deal with the like of suicide bombing terrorists who cannot be defeated by physical battle at all.)

Finally, the miracle of destroying Sancheiriv’s army was for a practical consideration; Klal Yisrael was in danger of being attacked by a formidable enemy.  Moreover, it was quite natural for Sancheiriv, a then world power bent on world domination, to attack Yerushalayim.  The battle with Amaleik, though, had not practical cause whatsoever.  Amaleik was (and is...) bent on fighting against HaShem and therefore attack His nation without mercy.  The battle with Amaleik was a spiritual/philosophical battle that needed a clear and decisive victory to achieve our ultimate purpose in this world.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thought for the Day: Love in the Time of Corona Virus/Anxiously Awaiting the Mashiach

Two scenarios: Scenario I: A young boy awakened in the middle of the night, placed in the back of vehicle, told not to make any noise, and the vehicle speeds off down the highway. Scenario II: Young boy playing in park goes to see firetruck, turns around to see scary man in angry pursuit, poised to attack. I experienced and lived through both of those scenarios. Terrifying, no? Actually, no; and my picture was never on a milk carton. Here's the context: Scenario I: We addressed both set of our grandparents as "grandma" and "grandpa". How did we distinguish? One set lived less than a half hour's drive; those were there "close grandma and grandpa". The other set lived five hour drive away; they were the "way far away grandma and grandpa". To make the trip the most pleasant for all of us, Dad would wake up my brother and I at 4:00AM, we'd groggily -- but with excitement! -- wander out and down to the garage where we'd crawl

Thought for the Day: אוושא מילתא Debases Yours Shabbos

My granddaughter came home with a list the girls and phone numbers in her first grade class.  It was cute because they had made it an arts and crafts project by pasting the list to piece of construction paper cut out to look like an old desk phone and a receiver attached by a pipe cleaner.  I realized, though, that the cuteness was entirely lost on her.  She, of course, has never seen a desk phone with a receiver.  When they pretend to talk on the phone, it is on any relatively flat, rectangular object they find.  (In fact, her 18 month old brother turns every  relatively flat, rectangular object into a phone and walks around babbling into it.  Not much different than the rest of us, except his train of thought is not interrupted by someone else babbling into his ear.) I was reminded of that when my chavrusa (who has children my grandchildrens age) and I were learning about אוושא מילתא.  It came up because of a quote from the Shulchan Aruch HaRav that referred to the noise of תקתוק

Thought for the Day: David HaMelech's Five Stages of Finding HaShem In the World

Many of us "sing" (once you have heard what I call carrying a tune, you'll question how I can, in good conscience, use that verb, even with the quotation marks) Eishes Chayil before the Friday night Shabbos meal.  We feel like we are singing the praises of our wives.  In fact, I have also been to chasunas where the chasson proudly (sometimes even tearfully) sings Eishes Chayil to his new eishes chayil.  Beautiful.  Also wrong.  (The sentiments, of course, are not wrong; just a misunderstanding of the intent of the author of these exalted words.) Chazal (TB Brachos, 10a) tell us that when Sholmo HaMelech wrote the words "She opens her mouth Mwith wisdom; the torah of kindness is on her tongue", that he was referring to his father, Dovid HaMelech, who (I am continuing to quote Chazal here) lived in five worlds and sang a song of praise [to each].  It seems to me that "world" here means a perception of reality.  Four times Dovid had to readjust his perc