The bracha of Mei'ein Shalosh on the fruits of Eretz Yisrael

[א] (halacha 198)

Presented in honor of Tu BiShvat - 'the New Year for the Tree'.

Question: One who eats from the fruits of the seven species that grew in Eretz Yisrael, how does he recite the final bracha?

Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Brochos¹ says: 'With what does one conclude? … Rav Chisda said: "Al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha" [for the land and for its fruits], and Rabbi Yochanan said: "Al ha'aretz ve'al ha'peiros" [for the land and for the fruits]. Rav Amram said: They do not disagree — this one [=the words of Rav Chisda, who lived in Bavel, were said to the residents of Bavel], and that one [=the words of Rabbi Yochanan, who lived in Eretz Yisrael, were said to the residents of Eretz Yisrael]. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak objected to this: They eat and we bless? [=that is, how is it conceivable that the people of Eretz Yisrael eat the fruits of the land, and the ones who would note this are the residents of Bavel?] Rather, reverse it: Rav Chisda said [=to the residents of Bavel, to bless over the fruits of outside the land] "Al ha'aretz ve'al ha'peiros," Rabbi Yochanan said [=to the residents of Eretz Yisrael] "Al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha."'

And the Rashba wrote there: 'And we hold that in the land we conclude "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha" like Rabbi Yochanan, and outside the land we bless "al ha'aretz ve'al ha'peiros" like Rav Chisda, and it stands to reason that even outside the land, if one eats fruits that come from the land, he blesses "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha," for according to what we held initially, that Rav Chisda said "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha," our only difficulty was "they eat and we bless" — evidently wherever they eat, we bless "ve'al peiroseha."'

And so the Mechaber ruled²: 'In the one bracha that is a summary of three for fruits of outside the land, one concludes "al ha'aretz ve'al ha'peiros," and in Eretz Yisrael one concludes "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha." And if outside the land one eats from fruits of the land, he likewise concludes "ve'al peiroseha."'

And so the Alter Rebbe wrote³ in Seder Brochos HaNehenin: 'In the bracha that is a summary of three for fruits of the seven species, one concludes outside the land "al ha'aretz ve'al ha'peiros," and in Eretz Yisrael "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha," and even fruits of Eretz Yisrael that went out to outside the land, one concludes after them "al ha'aretz ve'al peiroseha."'

However, in the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe he did not write the wording that one blesses over the fruits of the land, but⁴ the reason, simply put, is because the Siddur was written for those outside the land.

The Gra"ch Naeh wrote⁵: a) 'That in a case of doubt whether the fruits are from Eretz Yisrael or from outside the land, one concludes "ve'al ha'peiros," whether in Eretz Yisrael or outside the land.' b) And if one ate from fruits of Eretz Yisrael and concluded "ve'al ha'peiros," he has fulfilled his obligation. c) If one ate half a shiur from fruits of Eretz Yisrael and half a shiur from fruits of outside the land, he should conclude "al ha'peiros."

---

Notes:

¹ מד, א ↩

² או"ח סי' רח ס"י ↩

³ פי"ב הי"ב ↩

⁴ ראה סדבה"נ מהדרות הרא"א אות צו. קצות השלחן סי' מט בדה"ש ס"ק כד. ובהוספות ↩

⁵ בקצוה"ש סי' ס בדה"ש אות ה מהא"ר סי' רח ↩

---

From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — a daily halacha with reasons and sources

---

Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'

Join the WhatsApp group

---

Bracha Me'ein Shalosh — The Text Before the Conclusion

[2] (Halacha 199)

We learned that there is a change in the conclusion of the bracha of Mein Shalosh when one eats fruits of the Holy Land.

Question: Does one also change the wording before the conclusion?

Answer: The Aruch HaShulchan¹ wrote: 'And this applies to the final conclusion, but before the final conclusion all agree that one must say "and we will thank You for the Land and for the fruit of the vine," and for fruits one says "for the Land and for the fruits," even in Eretz Yisrael, for it suffices to say "her fruits" in the final conclusion [so it appears to me].'

However, the Kaf HaChaim² wrote: 'And also after "for You are good and do good to all" it is the custom to say "and we will thank You for the Land and for her sustenance," so that there shall be [wording] resembling the conclusion adjacent to the conclusion .. and likewise in the bracha for fruits it is the custom to say "and we will thank You for the Land and for her fruits," and in the bracha for wine "and we will thank You for the Land and for the fruit of her vine," and one concludes "Blessed are You Hashem, for the Land and for the fruit of her vine."'

And behold, the Alter Rebbe in Seder Birkas HaNehenin³ indeed wrote the actual law that one changes to "her fruits" for fruits of the Land, but he did not mention that one should also change adjacent to the conclusion; yet as the Rebbe⁴ writes, one cannot learn from this what his view is on this matter in practice, since it is possible that the reason for the omission stems from the rule: 'For it seems that the Alter Rebbe tends to minimize bringing laws that were not explained in the work before him (similar to the Rambam). And in particular those that are not customary "in our country."'

And likewise the Gra"ch Naeh wrote in the notes at the end of the work: 'In Ketzos HaShulchan siman 60, se'if 2, that in Eretz Yisrael one concludes the bracha of Mein Shalosh with "for the Land and for her fruits," one should add that also in the middle of the bracha one must say "and we will thank You for the Land and for her fruits"; and the reason this is not mentioned in the Shulchan Aruch and the poskim is simple — because in the wording of the Gemara and the Rishonim these words "and we will thank You" etc. are not found at all, therefore they did not speak of this; only the Levush, since there are those who say to say "and we will thank You" etc. so that there shall be [wording] resembling the conclusion adjacent to the conclusion, and according to this reason one must say "and for her fruits," similar to the conclusion.'

If so, one who eats fruits of Eretz Yisrael should say in the conclusion: 'and we will thank You for the Land and for her fruits, Blessed are You Hashem, for the Land and for her fruits.'

[However, when one drank wine from grapes of outside the Land and in addition ate fruits from Eretz Yisrael, some have noted⁵ that it requires examination whether one should say "for the fruit of the vine and her fruits," because then the implication of the words is "the fruits of the fruit of the vine," and therefore one should say "for the fruit of the vine and for the fruits." And this requires examination.]

---

Notes:

¹ או"ח סי' רח ס"ו ↩

² או"ח שם ס"ק נח ↩

³ פי"ב סי"ב ↩

⁴ אג"ק חט"ו אגרת ה'תשסה ↩

⁵ הערת הרא"א על סדר ברה"נ ↩

---

[3] (Halacha 200)

Question: Does one change the wording of the conclusion of the bracha of Mein Shalosh only for fruits of Eretz Yisrael, or also for wine from grapes of Eretz Yisrael or cake from flour of Eretz Yisrael?

Answer: Maran the Chida wrote in Birkei Yosef¹: 'The Rav of Halachos Ketanos² was asked regarding that which we are accustomed in Eretz Yisrael to conclude "for her sustenance and for her bounty" similar to the example of "for her fruits," and the Rav did not find support for the custom; nonetheless he wrote that one should not change the custom of the early authorities, end of his words. And it is found written in the Sefer Kaftor VaFerach³, who wrote explicitly that in Eretz Yisrael one concludes "for her sustenance" like the bracha for fruits. However, there he wrote that one also concludes "for the Land and for her nourishment." And also in the Agudah, chapter "Keitzad Mevarchin," it is written in the name of the Ri that in Eretz Yisrael one should bless "for the Land and for her nourishments," see there. But this was not the custom.

We see from the words of the Chida that even though the source in the Gemara was stated only regarding fruits of the Land, nevertheless in Eretz Yisrael it was the custom to change also for wine and for sustenance-foods, and there is a basis for this in the Rishonim.

And indeed the Gra"ch Naeh wrote⁴: 'And see in Birkei Yosef siman 208 that in Eretz Yisrael one concludes "and for her sustenance," and likewise it is proven there that for wine one concludes "and for the fruit of her vine"; however, from the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe, in the wording of the bracha of Mein Shalosh, where he did not mention any of this, it implies that he holds there is no distinction between Eretz Yisrael and outside the Land except in the bracha for fruits.'

But as the Rebbe writes, one cannot learn from the omission that this is the view of the Alter Rebbe, and these are the holy words of the Rebbe⁵: 'In the wording of the bracha of Mein Shalosh, whether to change in Eretz Yisrael and say "the fruit of her vine," "her sustenance," etc. — see Ketzos HaShulchan, end of the siman, in Badei HaShulchan there (and according to what he wrote there, one should not change adjacent to the conclusion of the bracha even for fruits. And he contradicts himself in what he wrote at the end of chelek 6). And in the Sefer Eretz Yisrael by Rav Tukachinsky, and references cited there. But it requires great examination whether the basis of what he wrote in Badei HaShulchan is correct, for it seems that the Alter Rebbe tends to minimize bringing laws that were not explained in the works before him (similar to the Rambam). And in particular those that are not customary "in our country" (and as referenced in Ketzos HaShulchan chelek 6 there for Birkas HaNehenin chapter 6, and Likkutei Achronim in the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe siman 507. — And perhaps for this reason he did not bring the bracha over the rainbow in the Birkas HaNehenin of the Siddur). And why should one change from the universal custom on account of a proof in which doubt may be cast? And perhaps there is in this a tradition among Anash who are in the Holy Land, may it be rebuilt, from the early Chabad chassidim who ascended there?'

If so, in practice the Rebbe's approach is that one cannot prove anything from the omission, and likewise one should not change from the custom in this. And if so, one should not change from the accepted custom in the Land⁶ to say "and for the fruit of her vine."

[However, to note that there are among the rabbis of Chabad who understood the conclusion of the Rebbe's letter differently, and this is not the place to elaborate, and therefore some have ruled⁷ not to change for wine from grapes of Eretz Yisrael, and to always say "and for the fruit of the vine."]

And with regard to the bracha "for her sustenance," "for sustenance-foods," some have written⁸ that the Ashkenazim were not accustomed to change and say "her sustenance."

However, to note that in any case there are those who say⁹ that nowadays sustenance-foods from flour of Eretz Yisrael are almost not to be found.

---

Notes:

¹ או"ח סי' רח ס"ק י ↩

² ח"ב סי' נ"ה ↩

³ דף ל"ו ע"ב ריש פרק י ↩

⁴ קצוה"ש בבדה"ש סק"ה ↩

⁵ אג"ק חט"ו אגרת ה'תשסה ↩

⁶ ראה הנסמן בפסקי תשובות סי' רח אות טו והערה 117 ↩

⁷ וכן הורה הגרמ"ש אשכנזי ז"ל (וכ"כ בשו"ע הקצר פס"ו דין א] ↩

⁸ ראה שו"ת ציץ אליעזר חי"א סי' יב. וראה גם אור שמח הל' ברכות פ"ח הי"ד 'לפי שעיקר הברכה נתקן על הפרי שלא נשתנה וניכרת גידולו, אבל מזון ומחי' דאשתנו, דכוסס חיטה מברך בורא פרי האדמה (ברכות לז, א), לא אמרי ועל מחייתה, או על מזונותיה, אפילו אוכל בארץ ישראל, ופשוט, ועיין פאת השלחן' ↩

⁹ וראה גם שו"ת הר צבי ח"א סי' קח, ושו"ת משנה הלכות ח"ו סי' מא ↩