Sefiras HaOmer
[A] (Halacha 253)
Question: Many communities count Sefiras HaOmer after Aleinu LeShabeiach; why do we count before it?
Answer1: a. The Shaar HaKollel writes2: 'The reason the Rebbe instituted counting Sefiras HaOmer before Aleinu is because, according to the Kabbalah of the Arizal, the custom is to say a mizmor and pesukim with the Sefirah, and these were not instituted or arranged in a manner that Kaddish Yasom would be said after the Sefirah. Therefore we count before Aleinu, so that the Kaddish after Aleinu will also be for the Sefirah. And those who say Kaddish Yasom after the Sefirah and then, after Aleinu, say Kaddish Yasom once again are mistaken, for it is forbidden to multiply Kaddeishim, just as it is forbidden to multiply brochos, as explained above regarding LeDovid Ori and Borchi Nafshi'3.
Based on this principle the Rebbe wrote4: 'Regarding your question, when the Sefirah is counted after Aleinu, whether to say Kaddish after the Sefirah: if I had the strength, I would institute accordingly not to add Kaddeishim needlessly, so that the Kaddish would be said only after Sefiras HaOmer and not between Aleinu and the Sefirah. And if they will in no way agree to this and wish to say Kaddish Yasom after Aleinu, then it is possible to say Kaddish also after the Sefirah, if that is the minhag of the place'. [And Rabbi Chaim Na'eh explained5: 'And in a place where this is the custom, he permitted saying Kaddish after Aleinu and after the Sefirah, for ultimately, since a mizmor is said in public, they are permitted to say Kaddish'].
b. Rabbi Chaim Na'eh wrote6: 'For we see that Aleinu is always at the end of all the tefillos and mizmorim, at Shacharis, Mincha and Maariv. For example: the Chanukah candles are lit in shul before the Aleinu of Mincha; the Megillah is read before the Aleinu of Maariv; the Kinos on Tishah B'Av before the Aleinu of Maariv; LeDovid Mizmor on the night of Rosh Hashanah before Aleinu; LeDovid Hashem Ori at Mincha before Aleinu — even though none of these relate directly to the tefillah. Rather, since before us is a great praise to the Holy One, blessed be He, in which we give thanks that He did not make us like the nations of the lands, we first complete everything that needs to be said and incorporate it within the tefillah, and afterwards the general praise of Aleinu. And the principle in this is that Aleinu is like the final hammer-blow and it seals the tefillah, and as for the other mitzvos that must be fulfilled immediately after the tefillah. Therefore one cannot raise a difficulty from the rule of "the frequent and the infrequent", since the place of Aleinu is only at the conclusion; and these words are reasonable'7.
c. In the Shulchan Aruch HaRav with the Biur Dover Shalom8 he wrote that this is based on the words of the Alter Rebbe there in se'if 26: 'Because we should make the Sefirah as early as possible, and as soon as the tefillah has concluded with the Kaddish after it, the mitzvah of Sefirah is incumbent upon us'. That is to say, one must count at the first moment possible, which is at the conclusion of the Kaddish after Shemoneh Esrei.
------------------------------------------
Question: We learned9 that when the congregation says Aleinu LeShabeiach, even one who has not yet finished his tefillah must say it with them; but in such a case, will he need to say Aleinu LeShabeiach again at the conclusion of his own private tefillah, on account of the order of the tefillah?
Answer: In the letters of the Rebbe we find two types of saying Aleinu LeShabeiach early because of the congregation:
1) The minhag of Ashkenaz is to say Aleinu LeShabeiach after U'va LeTziyon, before the Shir Shel Yom, whereas according to the minhag of Sefard — and so is our minhag — Aleinu LeShabeiach is said at the conclusion of the tefillah, after Pitum HaKetores. In a case where we daven in a place whose nusach is Ashkenaz, the Rebbe answered10: 'They should say it at the conclusion of the entire tefillah, as explained in the writings of the Arizal, and they should also join in and say it when the congregation says it, as explained [..], and on both occasions they should say all of it'. That is to say, one must say Aleinu LeShabeiach twice: a. together with the congregation after U'va LeTziyon; b. and once again at the conclusion of the tefillah, because of the importance of saying Aleinu at the conclusion of the tefillah according to our minhag and as explained in the writings of the Arizal11.
2) Regarding saying LeDovid Hashem and Sefiras HaOmer, there are communities that say them after Aleinu LeShabeiach; however, the Alter Rebbe placed them in the Siddur before Aleinu LeShabeiach. And on this the Rebbe wrote in a letter12: 'Regarding your question — he should say Aleinu with the congregation, and LeDovid etc. Ori after that'. And the implication of these words appears to be that in such a situation there is no need to go back and say Aleinu LeShabeiach once again.
And seemingly the distinction between the cases is that the reason for placing LeDovid Hashem and Sefiras HaOmer earlier is not connected with the order of the tefillah explained in the writings of the Arizal, but only with the principle of not multiplying Kaddeishim. Therefore, when we are in a minyan where in any case LeDovid Hashem or Sefiras HaOmer will be said after Aleinu LeShabeiach, we say Aleinu LeShabeiach together with them and afterwards LeDovid Hashem or Sefiras HaOmer; and since there is no change here in the order of the tefillah, there is no need to say Aleinu LeShabeiach again.
Thus, one who says Aleinu LeShabeiach early because of the minhag of Ashkenaz, or who said it before saying Tachanun13, must say Aleinu LeShabeiach again at the conclusion of his tefillah; but one who said it early only before LeDovid or Sefiras HaOmer need not say it once again.
Notes:
1 See Chikrei Minhogim, chelek 3, siman 78 ↩
2 Perek 49, os 7; perek 11, se'if 29. And see also Toras Menachem, vol. 25, p. 231 ↩
3 And see also Halacha 67 ↩
4 Igros Kodesh, vol. 5, p. 313 ↩
5 Ketzos HaShulchan - Haaros LeMaaseh, p. 184 ↩
6 Ibid., p. 183 ↩
7 And see what he wrote there regarding the Mishnah Berurah, siman 489, se'if katan 2, that it is said early because of temimos ↩
8 Siman 489, os 153 ↩
9 Halacha 147 ↩
10 Shulchan Menachem, vol. 1, p. 272 ↩
11 Shaar HaKavanos, Kavanas Aleinu LeShabeiach; Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar Krias Sefer Torah, perek 6 ↩
12 Igros Kodesh, vol. 19, p. 430 ↩
13 As explained in Halacha 146 ↩
[B] (Halacha 256)
Question: Why is the minhag not to do melachah at the time of Sefiras HaOmer?
Answer: The Shibbolei HaLeket wrote1: 'As for the custom of the women not to do melachah after sunset on the days between Pesach and Atzeres: some attribute the reason to the fact that between Pesach and Atzeres the students of Rabbi Akiva died, close to sunset .. and they are rewarded by having their praise made known in every generation, for they came forward to those students to honor them and to attend to them; therefore they adopted the custom not to do melachah at that time, in remembrance of the righteous women who were in that generation .. And my brother Rabbi Binyamin, may his Rock and Redeemer protect him .. explained the reason .. because the Omer .. and likewise the minchah of the sotah was a tenth of an eifah of barley flour. Therefore the righteous women adopted the custom not to do melachah all the nights of Sefiras HaOmer, to be for them for honor and for glory, and to be for them a remembrance and a sign, so that the fear of Hashem will be upon their faces, and all the women will be warned not to betray, as an evil woman does'.
Rabbeinu Yerucham wrote another reason2: 'To do melachah on those days of Sefiras HaOmer after sunset — the custom is not to do it, and this custom arose because of the students of Rabbi Akiva who died .. and were buried after sunset, and the people would refrain from their work. And furthermore, it is written שבע שבתות תמימות תהיין ("Seven complete weeks shall there be") — "Shabbosos" is an expression of resting and of release, as it is written שבתות שנים ("Shabbosos of years"): just as in the Shemittah year working the land is forbidden, so too here, after sunset they count and rest from their work. So wrote Rabbeinu Hai in a responsum'.
Question: Does the minhag not to do melachah apply to both men and women?
Answer: Seemingly the question depends on the reasons for the minhag: the reasons written in the Shibbolei HaLeket indicate that this minhag applies specifically to women [who attended to the burial of the students of Rabbi Akiva, and as a sign that a woman should not stray from her husband]; however, the reasons written by Rabbeinu Yerucham apply to men as well [that the people would refrain from their work; "Shabbosos" from the expression of resting from melachah]3.
However, the Tur wrote4 : 'I found written a custom not to do melachah'; afterwards he brought the reason of Rabbeinu Yerucham, and concluded: 'And the women adopted the custom not to do melachah'. And the Mechaber5 copied only the conclusion of the Tur's words: 'The women have the custom not to do melachah from Pesach until Atzeres, from sunset onward'.
And indeed the Acharonim wondered at the words of the Tur: why did he bring the reason of Rabbeinu Yerucham, which applies to men as well, and nevertheless conclude that this is the custom of the women?
And the Knesses HaGedolah wrote6: 'For although our Rabbeinu the Baal HaTurim, of blessed memory, wrote "and the women have the custom not to do melachah from when the sun sets", he spoke of the common case, since it is the way of women, and not men, to do the work of sewing. And so it is proven from the language of our Rabbeinu the Baal HaTurim, of blessed memory, himself, who wrote "and the people would refrain from work". And so it appears clear according to the other reason, because it is written שבע שבתות תמימות תהיינה ("Seven complete weeks shall there be") etc. And I likewise saw that Rabbeinu Yerucham, of blessed memory, did not mention women at all. And accordingly, what our Rabbeinu the Beis Yosef wrote in his short work, "the women have the custom not to do melachah" — he copied the language of our Rabbeinu the Baal HaTurim, of blessed memory, who spoke of the common case, as I wrote'.
Thus, the Mechaber wrote, based on the Tur, that the minhag of refraining from melachah applies only to women; but the Acharonim explained that even according to the Tur and the Mechaber it applies to men7.
The Taz wrote8 regarding the second reason in Rabbeinu Yerucham and the Tur: 'And according to this reason it appears that after he has counted, melachah is permitted immediately, as stated above'. However, the Eliyah Rabbah9 disagreed with him and wrote: 'And in the Tur and Rabbi Dovid Abudraham [ibid.] it is implied that it is forbidden until the morning even according to this reason. And furthermore, it is comparable to the Shemittah year, which is entirely forbidden; and so it is implied in the Levush'.
The Alter Rebbe10 decided in accordance with the words of the Acharonim, and in accordance with the view of the Taz, and these are his words: 'The custom is not to do melachah, both men and women, all the days of the Sefirah, from sunset until after Sefiras HaOmer. And an allusion to this is that it is stated שבע שבתות ("seven Shabbosos"), from the expression of resting: at the time of the Sefirah, that is, from sunset onward, one should rest from melachah until after he counts (and those women who do not count — it is possible that they should rest from melachah the entire night)'.
Question: What type of melachah does one refrain from?
Answer: The Siddur of Rabbi Yaakov Emden writes11: 'Even for men there is place for this minhag, as several great authorities wrote, and I have found fitting support for it, see Mor U'Ketziah; and this refers to full and lengthy melachah'. And in the Eishel Avraham12: 'Regarding melachah on the nights of the Sefirah .. anything that is permitted on Chol HaMoed, even according to a single opinion, there is no concern of piety whatsoever to be stringent'.
And based on this they wrote13 in the name of Rabbi Wosner a"h that household tasks, such as cooking, baking and cleaning, are permitted.
Notes:
1 Seder Pesach, siman 235 ↩
2 Toldos, Orach Chaim, nesiv 5, chelek 4, 45a ↩
3 And so wrote the Birkei Yosef, siman 493, se'if katan 8 ↩
4 Orach Chaim, siman 493. And see in Mishneh Halachos, chelek 8, siman 215, an explanation of the words of the Tur ↩
5 Orach Chaim, siman 493, se'if 4 ↩
6 Hagahos HaTur, ibid.; and so wrote the Pri Chadash, ibid. ↩
7 However, see Yalkut Yosef, Minhagei Yemei Sefiras HaOmer, se'if 41, who wrote in accordance with the plain language of the Mechaber: 'The women have the custom to refrain from doing melachah from Pesach until Atzeres, from sunset onward; and some say that it is forbidden for them only until after they count the Omer. And in any case, one should not protest against women who have the custom to weave and sew at the above times, for everything depends on the minhag, and there is no obligation at all in this; and one who did not adopt the custom did not adopt it'. And as the Chok Yaakov wrote, siman 493, se'if katan 12: 'And I have not seen anyone careful about this, even the women'. And see Kaf HaChaim, ibid., os 53; Shu"t Divrei Yatziv, Orach Chaim, siman 215 ↩
8 Siman 493, se'if katan 3 ↩
9 Ibid., se'if katan 12 ↩
10 Siman 493, se'if 9 ↩
11 Mavo 12, LeShaar Yomei Nissan, p. 261 ↩
12 Butchach - siman 493 ↩
13 Mibeis Levi, Piskei Halachos, p. 88. And so wrote the Kaf HaChaim, siman 493, se'if katan 54 ↩
[C] (Halacha 257)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in merit of Shmuel ben Bluma Malka, for his birthday — 28 Nissan.
Question: Are women obligated in Sefiras HaOmer?
Answer: The Rishonim disagreed about this, as follows: The Rambam1 wrote: 'And women and slaves are exempt from it'. And so wrote the Chinuch2, and the Meiri3 explained that this mitzvah is a time-bound positive mitzvah. And so wrote Mahari Korkos and the Kesef Mishneh regarding his view.
The Sefer HaZohar too wrote that this mitzvah pertains to men and not to women, in these words4: 'And because it is the secret of the masculine, women are exempt from this counting, and only males are obligated to count, so that each one may be bound as is fitting. Similarly, "יֵרָאֶה כָּל זְכוּרְךָ" ("all your males shall appear") — males, and not women; because the secret of the covenant is in the male and not in the female, and because the secret stands above, women are not obligated'. And it is further written5: 'And because these days are days of the masculine world, this counting was given over only to men alone'.
However, the Ramban6 disagreed and wrote: 'And know that this Tanna teaches thus: What is a time-bound positive mitzvah? For example, sukkah. And what is a positive mitzvah that is not time-bound? For example, mezuzah. And the Tanna taught and left some out: among time-bound positive mitzvos he left out tefillin, regarding which it is written explicitly that they are exempt — or alternatively, he holds that it is not time-bound — and he left out re'iyah; and among positive mitzvos that are not time-bound he left out many: fear and honor, bikkurim and challah, covering the blood, the first of the shearing, the gifts, Sefiras HaOmer, unloading, loading, the redemption of the firstborn donkey — and most of the mitzvos are so'.
And in Sefer Imrei Shefer7 (on the Torah) by Rabbeinu Yehudah, son of the Maharam Chalava, he wrote: 'And the Rav, my master and father, of blessed memory, wrote that regarding Sefiras HaOmer women are obligated, and these are his words in his Chiddushim: Every time-bound positive mitzvah — men are obligated and women are exempt .. And the Ramban, of blessed memory, wrote: And Sefiras HaOmer — women are obligated in it. And so is primary, for we exclude only what is time-bound, and Sefiras HaOmer is not brought about by time but by the act, that is, the offering of the Omer. And even though the Omer depends on time, nevertheless the counting depends only on the act of the offering, and it is not time-bound'8.
And halachically the poskim wrote that women are exempt, in accordance with the view of the Rambam and the Zohar, as the Chok Yaakov9 wrote, *that so wrote all the poskim.
Question: May women count and recite the bracha?
Answer: The Magen Avraham10 wrote: 'Women are exempt from the counting, for it is a time-bound positive mitzvah (Rambam; and so it is written in the Zohar, Tetzaveh, p. 319); however, they have already accepted it upon themselves as an obligation'.
[And some explained11 the reason that women have the practice of counting Sefiras HaOmer: since one of the reasons that women are exempt from time-bound positive mitzvos is that they are occupied with household work, therefore, since12 the practice is not to do work at the time of the counting, they had the practice of counting. And another reason for the counting: it has already been explained13 that the practice is not to do work until they count, and if not, they would have to refrain from work the entire night].
However, the Mishnah Berurah14 remarked: 'And it seems that in our countries women do not have the practice of counting at all'.
And some rejected women counting, for reasons based on Kabbalah, as the Ben Ish Chai15 wrote: 'And therefore regarding the mitzvos of tzitzis, tefillin and Sefiras HaOmer, our master [the Ari], of blessed memory, needed to explain to us a specific reason that does not pertain to women, to teach us that they are not permitted to fulfill them voluntarily like other time-bound positive mitzvos; for with these mitzvos, if women perform them, it is considered within the category of one who is exempt from something and does it, etc., and all the more so they are not permitted to recite a bracha on them'.
And the Acharonim further disagreed regarding women who do count, whether they may recite the bracha, just as the poskim disagreed regarding other time-bound positive mitzvos, whether women may recite the bracha: The Chida16 wrote: 'And it appears to me that if they practice with lulav and the like according to Rabbeinu Tam, then with the counting too they should practice according to their way. And so wrote the Magen Avraham (se'if katan 1)'.
However, in the Kaf HaChaim17 he wrote: 'And all this is according to the custom of Ashkenazim, whose women have the practice of reciting a bracha on time-bound positive mitzvos, as is written below in siman 589, se'if 6, in the gloss, see there; but Sefardi women in any case should not recite the bracha if they wish to fulfill the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer; rather, if possible, they should hear it from men and have intent to fulfill their obligation, and afterwards they should count'.
However, in practice the Alter Rebbe already ruled18: 'Women and slaves are exempt from this mitzvah, because it is a time-bound positive mitzvah; and in some countries19 the women have taken this mitzvah upon themselves as an obligation, and there is no concern of a prohibition in their reciting a bracha on it even though they are exempt from it; see siman 1[7]'.
Thus, in practice, women count Sefiras HaOmer, and with a bracha.
Notes:
1 Hilchos Temidin U'Musafin, ch. 7, halacha 24 ↩
2 Mitzvah 306 ↩
3 End of Pesachim ↩
4 Vol. 2, Tetzaveh, 183a ↩
5 Vol. 3, Emor, 97b ↩
6 Kiddushin 33b ↩
7 Bereishis 49:28. Also printed in Shitas HaKadmonim on Maseches Bava Kamma, pp. 334–335 ↩
8 See what is written on this in Shu"t Avnei Nezer, Orach Chaim, siman 384; Divrei Yechezkel, siman 45, os 4; Divrei Malkiel, vol. 3, siman 5; the Rip Perla on the Rasag, vol. 1 (30b ff.) ↩
9 Siman 489, se'if katan 3 ↩
10 Siman 489, se'if katan 1 ↩
11 Shu"t Si'ach Yitzchak, siman 222 ↩
12 Halacha number 256 ↩
13 There, se'if katan 3 ↩
14 Shu"t Rav Pe'alim, vol. 1, Sod Yesharim, siman 12 ↩
15 Birkei Yosef, siman 489, se'if katan 22 ↩
16 Siman 489, se'if katan 9 ↩
17 Siman 489, se'if 2 ↩
18 The Rebbe remarked (Likkutei Sichos, vol. 7, p. 280): 'And that which the Alter Rebbe wrote (unlike the Magen Avraham), that only in some countries — perhaps one may say that this is because of the reason given in the Zohar (vol. 2, 183a (cited in the Magen Avraham there); vol. 3, 97b)' ↩
[D] (Halacha 258)
The study of this halacha is for the elevation of the soul of Avraham Leib ben Zalman (Sandu) Litman, of blessed memory
Question: Must Sefiras HaOmer be done standing?
Answer: This discussion divides into two1: a. The bracha. b. The counting.
a. Regarding the bracha: The Rishonim2 wrote in the name of the Yerushalmi: 'All brochos are recited standing'.
And in the Teshuvos HaGeonim3 it is brought: 'And as to what you asked, whether we find a support for all brochos being said standing — certainly it is so, as it is written: "ויעמוד ויברך את כל קהל ישראל" ("And he stood and blessed the entire congregation of Israel"); and so it is from our early Sages, of blessed memory, that the support for all brochos being said standing is that it is written: "ויעמוד ויברך" ("And he stood and blessed")'.
Now, in Hilchos Tzitzis the Mechaber4 wrote: 'He should wrap himself in tzitzis and recite the bracha standing'. And the Magen Avraham5 wrote: 'Meaning that both the bracha and the wrapping should be done standing. And this requires investigation, for in Yoreh Deah, at the beginning of siman 328, it implies that it is permitted to recite the bracha seated, and it is an explicit Mishnah. And one may say that separating challah is not so much of a mitzvah, for one does it only to make his food fit, similar to shechitah — so it appears to me'.
And based on this the Alter Rebbe6 wrote: 'All brochos over mitzvos must be said standing, except for the bracha of shechitah and of separating challah, which are not so much of a mitzvah, for one does them only to make his food fit. But as for the performance of the mitzvos themselves, some of them need not be done standing and some of them must, as will be explained, each one in its place, with the help of Heaven'.
However, this law is l'chatchilah; but b'dieved, if he recited the bracha seated, he does not go back and recite it again, as the Alter Rebbe wrote in the Siddur, in Hilchos Tzitzis: 'The wrapping must be done standing, and the bracha too must be said standing, l'chatchilah'7.
Thus, in practice, brochos over mitzvos should l'chatchilah be recited standing, except for brochos that are to make one's food fit.
b. Regarding the counting: The Geonim8 wrote: 'And Sefiras HaOmer likewise is done standing, as it is written: "מהחל חרמש בקמה" ("From when the sickle is first put to the standing grain") — why does the verse say bakamah? To teach you that you should count b'kimah, standing upright'9.
And so it is written in the Zohar10: 'And therefore this counting is done standing, while matters of the lower world are done sitting and not standing. And this is the secret of the tefillah said standing and the tefillah said seated'.
And so it is written in the Pesikta11: 'For you — standing, as it is said: "מהחל חרמש בקמה" ("From when the sickle is first put to the standing grain"), that is to say, b'komah, upright; and from it we learn regarding every mitzvah in which "for you" is stated, such as milah and tzitzis'.
And based on this the Rambam12 wrote: 'And one counts only standing; and if he counted seated, he has fulfilled his obligation'.
And so wrote the Rosh13: 'And when they recite the bracha, they recite it standing, as the Rabbis taught: bakamah you shall begin to count — do not read bakamah but b'komah, upright'.
And halachically the Mechaber14 ruled: 'And one must count standing'.
And so the Alter Rebbe ruled15: 'The counting — one must recite the bracha16 standing, as it is said bakamah, and the Sages expounded: do not read bakamah but b'komah you shall begin to count. Nevertheless, if he counted seated, he has fulfilled his obligation, since this exposition is merely an asmachta'.
Thus, in practice, the counting itself too must be done standing, but if he counted seated, he has fulfilled his obligation17; and therefore even a person who counts without a bracha (for example, one who forgot to recite the bracha one day) must stand for the counting.
Notes:
1 See Olas Tamid, Orach Chaim, siman 8, se'if katan 1; Pri Megadim, Mishbetzos Zahav, siman 8, se'if katan 1; Mishbetzos Zahav, siman 432, se'if katan 3. However, in the words of the Rishonim it sometimes appears that it is one law; see Orchos Chaim, Hilchos Tzitzis, os 27; and also in the Bach and the Levush, siman 8 ↩
2 Orchos Chaim, there. Cited in the Beis Yosef, siman 8 ↩
3 Shaarei Teshuvah, siman 79 ↩
4 Siman 8, se'if 1 ↩
5 There, se'if katan 2 ↩
6 Orach Chaim, siman 8, se'if 3 ↩
7 And see what the Tzemach Tzedek wrote in Piskei Dinim, in the Likkutim, p. 400c; Machaneh Yosef, Tzitzis, siman 20 ↩
8 Shaarei Teshuvah, there ↩
9 And so wrote R' Yitzchak ben Gias in Shaarei Simchah, Hilchos Chadash U'Sefiras HaOmer, cited in the Kesef Mishneh, Hilchos Temidin U'Musafin, ch. 7, halacha 23; and the Kesef Mishneh concludes: 'And in the Zohar, Parshas Tetzaveh, he wrote the secret of the matter, why one must count standing ↩
10 Vol. 3, Parshas Emor, 97b ↩
11 Vayikra 65a. (The Chida wrote in Birkei Yosef, Orach Chaim, siman 8, se'if katan 2: 'And it is known that the Pesikta, unqualified, is from our Sages, of blessed memory. And regarding several laws of the Rambam, Maran, the mighty one, taught in the Kesef Mishneh that their source is the Pesikta. And the author of the Pesikta, Rabbeinu Toviah, was close to the time of the Geonim') ↩
12 Hilchos Temidin U'Musafin, ch. 7, halacha 23 ↩
13 Pesachim, ch. 10, siman 41. (And it has already been noted that no such Baraisa is found; see Shu"t Chaim Sha'al, vol. 2, siman 1, and Birkei Yosef, siman 8, se'if katan 2) ↩
14 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 1 ↩
15 Siman 489, se'if 4 ↩
16 It is worth noting what is written in the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe — Raskin edition, folio 57, at the asterisk in the marginal note, that perhaps the manuscript read: 'The counting must be done standing', and the abbreviation was mistakenly expanded to 'must recite the bracha' instead of 'must be' ↩
17 In Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Sefiras HaOmer, se'if 11, he wrote: 'For an elderly or sick person, a time of pressing need is like b'dieved; and therefore an elderly or sick person for whom it is difficult to stand may count seated l'chatchilah' ↩
[E] (Halacha 259)
The study of this halacha is for the elevation of the soul of the shliach, Rabbi Binyamin, may he rest in peace, son of יבדלחט״א Rabbi Menachem Mendel Wolff
Question: Does the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer apply today min haTorah or miderabbanan? (1)
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Menachos1 66a says: 'Abaye said: It is a mitzvah to count the days and it is a mitzvah to count the weeks. The Rabbanan of the house of Rav Ashi counted the days and counted the weeks. Ameimar counted the days and did not count the weeks; he said: It is a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash' [and Rashi explained: He said, this counting nowadays is not an obligation, since there is no Omer; rather it is merely a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, and therefore the days suffice]'.
And the Rishonim disagreed whether Abaye and the Rabbanan of the house of Rav Ashi too, whom the halacha follows [so that in practice we count both days and weeks — nevertheless], agree with Ameimar on the point that the counting today is only a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, and the reason that both days and weeks are said is that the Sages' enactments are modeled on Torah law; or whether they disagree entirely with Ameimar, and in their view the mitzvah applies min haTorah today as well.
According to the Rambam this mitzvah applies min haTorah today as well, as he wrote2: 'It is a positive mitzvah to count seven complete weeks from the day the Omer is brought, as it is said: "וספרתם לכם ממחרת השבת שבע שבתות" ("And you shall count for yourselves from the morrow of the Shabbos seven weeks"), … This mitzvah is upon every man of Israel, in every place and at every time'.
And the Ran3 explained: 'And it seems to me that he, of blessed memory, holds that it is Ameimar, who did not count the weeks, who holds that it is merely a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, and therefore he would exempt himself from the weeks; but those other Rabbanan, who counted days and weeks, whom we follow, hold that nowadays it is min haTorah'.
And so the Raavyah4 wrote that Sefiras HaOmer is min haTorah: 'And where he began to recite the bracha with the intention, thinking that today is four days, and concluded with five, and today is five days — or alternatively, today is four days — do we follow the opening, so that when today is five days (four days) he has not fulfilled his obligation, since Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam is the main part, and he did not recite the bracha with the intention of five days, and so he has not fulfilled his obligation? Or perhaps we follow the conclusion, that is, the ending, and he has fulfilled his obligation. And likewise the reverse, if today is four days. And it appears to me that in both cases he has not fulfilled his obligation, for we require both the opening and the conclusion. It is like the case in the first chapter of Brochos: he took a cup of beer, thinking it was wine, and he began and recited the bracha with the intention of wine and concluded with [that of] beer — what is the law; do we follow the opening or not? [And it was not resolved.] And so here too, if he concluded with the intention of the opening he has not fulfilled his obligation, for he erred in the count; and since the counting is min haTorah, we follow the stringency, and he must count and recite the bracha again. And even though the bracha is not min haTorah, since the counting is min haTorah and he must count, it is not proper to count without a bracha, and there is no issue here of a bracha l'vatalah'.
However, the view of Tosafos5 is that the mitzvah today is miderabbanan: 'It appears that at a time of doubtful nightfall one may recite the bracha, and one need not wait until it is definitely night, since it is a doubt regarding a rabbinic law'.
And so wrote the Rosh6: 'And the Ri explained: and it appears that at a time of doubtful nightfall one may recite the bracha, and one need not wait until it is definitely night, since it is a doubt regarding a rabbinic law'.
And so wrote the Baal HaMaor7 and the Baal HaItur8.
And the Ran9 wrote: 'And most commentators10 agree that Sefiras HaOmer now, when there is no bringing and no offering, is merely miderabbanan, a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, as Ameimar said there: it is merely a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash'.
And halachically, the Beis Yosef11 cited the words of the Raavyah, that one recites the bracha again because it is a doubt regarding a Torah law, and wrote: 'And according to what I wrote in the name of the Ran, that most commentators agree that Sefiras HaOmer now is merely miderabbanan, it is a doubt regarding a rabbinic matter, and we are lenient, and he does not recite the bracha again'. And based on this12 he ruled in the Shulchan Aruch13: 'If he began and said Baruch Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech HaOlam with the intention of saying today is four, thinking that it is four, and remembered and concluded with five, and it is five — or the reverse, that it is four and he began with the intention of saying four, and erred and concluded with five — he does not recite the bracha again'.
And so ruled the Alter Rebbe14: 'And this mitzvah applies in Eretz Yisroel and in chutz la'aretz, when the Beis HaMikdash stands and when it does not. And some say that nowadays, when the Beis HaMikdash does not stand and the Omer is not offered, this mitzvah does not apply at all by the words of the Torah, but rather by the words of the Sofrim, who instituted it as a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash; and this is primary. Nevertheless, whatever the Sages instituted, they instituted modeled on Torah law, and there is no difference between them except in matters that will be explained'. (And further on in his words it appears that nevertheless it is good to take into account the views that hold it is min haTorah15).
Thus, in practice, the ruling is that the primary view is that of those who hold that the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer applies today miderabbanan.
With Hashem's help, in the next halacha we will learn the practical ramifications of this ruling.
Notes:
1 66a ↩
2 Hilchos Temidin U'Musafin, ch. 7, halachos 22 and 24 ↩
3 On the Rif, Pesachim 28a ↩
4 Pesachim, siman 526; cited in the Mordechai, Megillah, remez 803 ↩
5 Menachos 66a ↩
6 Pesachim, ch. 10, siman 40 ↩
7 Pesachim 28a in the pages of the Rif ↩
8 Hilchos Matzah U'Maror, 137b ↩
9 Pesachim, there ↩
10 Regarding the view of Sefer HaChinuch — mitzvah 306, at its end — the Acharonim disagreed (since there are several versions of his words): the Minchas Chinuch, os 5, wrote that according to his view it is a rabbinic mitzvah; but some wrote that he holds it is min haTorah — see the Mishnah Berurah, Biur Halacha, s.v. Lispor HaOmer, and following him the Kaf HaChaim, siman 489, os 5; Yabia Omer, vol. 3, Orach Chaim, siman 27, os 17; Ohr L'Tzion, vol. 3, ch. 16, note 2 ↩
11 Orach Chaim, siman 489 ↩
12 See Be'er HaGolah, os 20; Taz, se'if katan 9; Pri Chadash, there; Shu"t Yechaveh Daas, vol. 1, siman 23 ↩
13 Siman 489, se'if 6 ↩
14 Siman 489, se'if 2 ↩
15 See the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe, siman 489, se'if 13 and se'if 17 ↩
[F] (Halacha 260)
The ramifications of the ruling that Sefiras HaOmer is primarily miderabbanan (2)
Question: From when may one count Sefiras HaOmer?
Answer: The Rosh1 wrote: 'And the Ri explained: and it appears that at a time of doubtful nightfall one may recite the bracha, and one need not wait until it is definitely night, since it is a doubt regarding a rabbinic law; and it further appears that close to nightfall is even preferable, because of temimos'.
And so wrote the Smag2: 'And Rabbeinu Shimshon son of Rabbi Avraham wrote that at the very least, the fact that it is only a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash is effective in that at a time of doubtful nightfall one may recite the bracha'3. And so wrote the Tur4.
However, Tosafos5 wrote that it does not seem right to count before tzeis hakochavim, and so wrote the Ran6: 'But nevertheless, all this demonstrates that the counting now is only miderabbanan; and therefore they said in Tosafos that since it is miderabbanan, it is good to count on the first day at a time of doubtful nightfall, so that there will be seven entirely complete weeks. And this is not correct, that one should put himself into doubt l'chatchilah; and if it is because of temimos, one should not be more stringent regarding temimos nowadays, when it is miderabbanan, than with a counting that is min haTorah; rather, whenever one counts at night, we call it temimos'.
And in the Shu"t of the Rashba7 he wrote: '..How can he say: today is ten days of the Omer, when they are only nine? For that day is the ninth and not the tenth until tzeis hakochavim. And the meticulous do not count during the days of the Sefirah until tzeis hakochavim, and so it is proper to do'. And the Beis Yosef wrote: 'And this is the custom of the world'.
And halachically the Mechaber8 wrote: 'If they erred on a cloudy day and recited the bracha on Sefiras HaOmer, they count again when it gets dark. And the meticulous do not count until tzeis hakochavim, and so it is proper to do'.
However, the Bach9 wrote: 'But the custom of the world now is to recite the bracha at a time of doubtful nightfall; but before the time of doubtful nightfall it is obvious that one should not recite the bracha, even on Erev Shabbos — see the Responsa of the Maharshal, siman 13 — unlike what is found in the Minhogim10 in the name of the Raavan'.
And the Alter Rebbe11 wrote: 'Some say that it is permitted to recite the bracha and count during bein hashmashos, even though it is doubtful night and doubtful the past day. And if so, how can he say: today is two days — perhaps it is still the first day? Nevertheless, since the counting nowadays is by the words of the Sofrim, a doubt regarding the words of the Sofrim is treated leniently. And some disagree with this and say that l'chatchilah one should not put himself into a doubt, even regarding the words of the Sofrim, and one should not count until tzeis hakochavim, which is definitely night; and so do the meticulous, and so it is proper for every person to do. Nevertheless, the custom of the masses now is in accordance with the first view, to count during bein hashmashos .. But the meticulous, who count at tzeis hakochavim, who erred on a cloudy day and counted during bein hashmashos, need not count again at all at tzeis hakochavim according to the strict law, even without a bracha, since they have already fully fulfilled their obligation according to the strict law by having counted during bein hashmashos, which is doubtful night, and a doubt regarding the words of the Sofrim is treated leniently. (Nevertheless, in order to take into account the words of those who say that the counting nowadays is min haTorah, it is good for them to count again at tzeis hakochavim without a bracha)'.
Thus, in practice, the custom of the masses is to rely on its being miderabbanan and to recite the bracha and count during bein hashmashos; but the meticulous count l'chatchilah at tzeis hakochavim, and so it is proper for every person to do. And b'dieved, if they counted early, one should count again without a bracha, to take into account those who say that the counting is min haTorah12.
Notes:
1 Pesachim, ch. 10, siman 40 ↩
2 Asin, siman 200 ↩
3 And see the Sfas Emes, Menachos 66a, s.v. Zecher LaMikdash, who wrote similarly ↩
4 Siman 489 ↩
5 Menachos 66a, s.v. Zecher LaMikdash ↩
6 Pesachim 28a in the pages of the Rif ↩
7 Vol. 1, siman 154; cited in the Beis Yosef, siman 489 ↩
8 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 2 ↩
9 Siman 489; cited in the Chok Yaakov, se'if katan 12 ↩
10 Mahara Tyrnau, in the Hagahos, p. 61, os 21 ↩
11 Siman 489, se'ifim 12–13 ↩
12 And for the Sefardi custom, see Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Sefiras HaOmer, se'if 14: 'The time of Sefiras HaOmer is at night, and if he forgot to count at the beginning of the night, he may count throughout the entire night. And l'chatchilah it is proper to count after tzeis hakochavim, which is about eighteen minutes after sunset; and so is the custom of those meticulous in mitzvos, to wait until after tzeis hakochavim. And how good and how pleasant is the custom practiced in several Jewish communities, that during the days of the Sefirah, between Minchah and Arvis, the congregation sits, and a talmid chacham in the congregation stands and expounds to them words of Aggadah and moral instruction until the time of the counting arrives; and this is included in one mitzvah bringing another. Nevertheless, a congregation that finished tefillas Arvis immediately after sunset, which is still the time of 'bein hashmashos', doubtful day and doubtful night, and they do not wait until tzeis hakochavim, and there is a concern that part of the congregation will come to forget and lose the mitzvah of the counting — they may count with a bracha' ↩
[G] (Halacha 261)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in merit of the soldier in Tzivos Hashem Sholom Dovber ben Nechama Sarah, for his birthday
The ramifications of the ruling that Sefiras HaOmer is primarily miderabbanan (3)
Question: Why is it specifically after the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer that we ask for the restoration of the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash?
Answer: Tosafos1 wrote: 'And after he has recited the bracha on the counting, he says: Yehi ratzon that it be rebuilt, etc. — which is not so with the blowing of the shofar2 and the lulav; and this is the reason: because there is now only a remembrance of the building of the Beis HaMikdash, whereas with shofar and lulav there is an action'. And so it is written in Sefer Shibbolei HaLeket, Seder Pesach, siman 234: 'It is proper to mention the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash and to pray that it return to its former state'.
And the Mateh Moshe3 wrote: 'And one says Yehi ratzon after the counting, because now the counting is miderabbanan, since the Beis HaMikdash does not stand; therefore we say: Yehi ratzon that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt, and then it will be min haTorah and we will fulfill its mitzvah'.
And so the Alter Rebbe wrote4: 'After the counting, the custom is to say: Yehi ratzon that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt, etc., because now we count only as a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, and in this counting there is no performance of a mitzvah at all, for the mitzvah is to count for the Omer, and now we have no Omer to count for; rather, the Sages instituted counting as a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash. Therefore we pray that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt and that we fulfill the mitzvah in its proper manner'.
The Rebbe explains5 that the inner reason that specifically with this mitzvah we pray for the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash, and not with the other mitzvos that the Sages instituted as a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, is that the content of Sefiras HaOmer is the drawing down and revelation of the fiftieth gate, which pertains especially to the future Geulah.
And in a note6 he adds: 'And simply, one may say that since the manner of fulfilling the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer (counting the days) nowadays is exactly the same as the manner of its fulfillment when the Beis HaMikdash stood (unlike the other mitzvos done as a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash, where the difference between nowadays and the time when the Beis HaMikdash stood is also in the manner of the action), therefore there is a need to emphasize that this is only a remembrance of the Beis HaMikdash — through 'praying that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt and that we fulfill the mitzvah in its proper manner'.
However, we find among the Rishonim another version of this tefillah, as the Avudraham7 wrote: 'And after he has counted the Omer he asks of Hashem and says: HaRachaman, may He restore the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash to its place speedily in our days'. And so is the version in the writings of the Arizal8, and according to this version the Alter Rebbe wrote the version in the Siddur.
The Rebbe9 sharpens the difference between the versions: 'And in several siddurim (and so it is in the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe) — 'HaRachaman, He will restore to us the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash etc.' And one may say that the addition in this version over the version 'Yehi ratzon etc. that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt speedily in our days' is that this is not (only) in the language of request and tefillah (to the point of drawing down a new will — 'Yehi ratzon'10), but (also) in the language of certainty'.
------
There are communities that have the custom of saying: Hineni muchan u'mezuman to fulfill the positive mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer, as it is written in the Torah, "וספרתם לכם" ("And you shall count for yourselves"). However, we have seen that according to most poskim the mitzvah today is not min haTorah, and as the Rebbe remarked11: 'But regarding the intention of the mitzvah (that one intends to fulfill the obligation of the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer) — one may intend to fulfill the obligation of the mitzvah as it is, whether miderabbanan or min haTorah (and some have remarked on the version in several siddurim, 'Hineni muchan u'mezuman to fulfill the positive mitzvah' — that since nowadays it is only miderabbanan, one should not say 'positive mitzvah' (which implies a mitzvah min haTorah), but simply 'the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer' (see the references in the above-mentioned Sefer Sefiras HaOmer (by Rabbi Tz. Kahan), pp. 180–181))12.
And so it was remarked in Shu"t Divrei Yatziv13: 'And for many days now it has been my custom to skip these words and to say: to fulfill the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer, and it is written in the Torah etc., since according to the view of most poskim the counting nowadays is miderabbanan; and I was glad to find now in the new Orchos Chaim that he brought so in the name of Sefer Meorei Ohr, see there. And all the more so one should be concerned about this according to the view of the Rambam, at the end of ch. 2 of Hilchos Mamrim, that included in bal tosif is not to say of a rabbinic enactment that it is a Torah law, on which they elaborated greatly; and if so, there is a concern of the prohibition of bal tosif in this matter. And perhaps one may say, regarding the printed version, that it is to take into account the view of those great authorities who hold that its obligation is a Torah law, for if he intends only to fulfill a rabbinic mitzvah, one may say that this is a deficiency in the intention. … And regarding the essence of the version, it is further possible that the positive mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer means a rabbinic positive mitzvah, and what is said, as it is written in the Torah, means: as it is written in the Torah — the essence of the mitzvah when the Beis HaMikdash stands, and now it is a remembrance of that; and so it has a basis in the Torah, as above; and consider this carefully'.
And the Sefardi sages likewise disagreed about this: see Shu"t Yechaveh Daas14, who wrote to omit it, while on the other hand in Shu"t Ohr L'Tzion15 he wrote that it may be said.
Notes:
1 Megillah 20b ↩
2 See Gilyonei HaShas, Megillah 20b, who discusses the intent of Tosafos regarding the blowing of the shofar; and in the Biur of the Rip on the Sefer HaMitzvos of the Rasag, Asei 51, he explains: 'That is, the blowing of the shofar on Yom Kippur, which is only a remembrance of the Yom Kippur of the Yovel' ↩
3 Amud HaAvodah, Sefiras HaOmer, siman 667 ↩
4 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 11 ↩
5 Sichah of Acharon shel Pesach 5751 — Toras Menachem, vol. 3, p. 87 ↩
6 Note 82 ↩
7 Tefillos HaPesach ↩
8 Shaar HaKavanos, Inyan Sefiras HaOmer, Derush 12; Mishnas Chassidim, Maseches HaOmer, ch. 8, se'if 1 ↩
9 In the above sichah, in note 80 ↩
10 Referenced in Likkutei Sichos, vol. 22, p. 121 ↩
11 Toras Menachem, there, p. 95, in the second marginal note to note 48 ↩
12 In Shu"t Divrei Moshe, siman 29, he remarked: 'It is like a kind of contradiction: before the counting we say that we intend to fulfill the positive mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer min haTorah, and immediately after the counting we say Yehi ratzon that the Beis HaMikdash be rebuilt, that is, that soon we will merit to fulfill the mitzvah of the counting min haTorah with the building of the Beis HaMikdash'. However, some have resolved this (see Piskei Teshuvos, siman 489, os 10), that on the contrary, this is the intent: since we conclude that we will merit the avodah of the Beis HaMikdash speedily in our days, then retroactively this will be a counting min haTorah toward the bringing of the Shtei HaLechem ↩
13 Orach Chaim, siman 214. And see also Teshuvos V'Hanhagos, vol. 1, siman 310, and vol. 2, siman 247 ↩
14 Vol. 6, siman 29 ↩
15 Vol. 3, ch. 16, note 2 ↩
[H] (Halacha 262)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of Mrs. Chana Yaffa bas Tzipporah, on the occasion of her birthday, for long and good days and years
Intention in Sefiras HaOmer / The implications of the ruling that Sefiras HaOmer is primarily Rabbinic (4)
Question: Has a person who counted without intention fulfilled his obligation?
Answer: The Mechaber wrote1: 'Some say that mitzvos do not require intention, and some say that they require intention to fulfill one's obligation in performing that mitzvah, and so is the halacha'.
And the Magen Avraham wrote2: 'And so is the halacha. But this applies only to mitzvos of Torah origin; Rabbinic mitzvos, however, do not require intention (Radvaz vol. 1, 20 (vol. 4, 1094), and Mishpat Tzedek vol. 2, 2, Knesses HaGedolah siman 589)'.
However, the Pri Chadash3 wrote: 'Nevertheless, it appears that with regard to the halacha we make no distinction between Rabbinic mitzvos and mitzvos of Torah origin, for in all of them we require intention, and otherwise one has not fulfilled his obligation, since whatever the Rabbis enacted, they enacted along the lines of Torah law'.
If so, the Magen Avraham and the Pri Chadash4 disagree regarding Rabbinic mitzvos — whether one fulfills his obligation without intention. According to the Pri Chadash, even with Rabbinic mitzvos one does not fulfill his obligation without intention, whereas the Magen Avraham cited the Radvaz, who holds that with Rabbinic mitzvos one fulfills his obligation even without intention.
In practice, the Alter Rebbe in siman 605 cited this dispute, but noted that it will be explained in siman 475, and there6 he wrote: 'Any mitzvah of Rabbinic origin does not require intention; but there are those who disagree with this and say that mitzvos of Rabbinic origin also require intention, because whatever the Sages enacted, they enacted along the lines of Torah law, and it is good to be concerned for their words'.
That is to say, the position of the Alter Rebbe7 is that with Rabbinic mitzvos the primary view is that intention is not required, although it is good to be concerned for the view that requires intention.
Now, regarding Sefiras HaOmer, the Mechaber wrote8: 'One whose friend asks him during bein hashmashos how many days of the counting it is tonight should tell him: Yesterday was such-and-such; for if he tells him: Today is such-and-such, he cannot go back and count with a bracha'.
And similarly the Rema wrote9: 'And even if he answered Amen to the bracha of the congregation, if his intention was not to fulfill his obligation, he should go back, recite the bracha and count at night'.
We see from their words that even when he counted without any specific intention, he cannot go back and recite the bracha, because (it is possible10 that) he has fulfilled his obligation, since intention is not required; and in order not to fulfill it, he must have in mind that he is not fulfilling it.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe11: 'If he did not stipulate explicitly in his mind not to fulfill his obligation with this counting, intending to count when he remembers at night, but rather counted without any specific intention — even though he did not recite the bracha now, nor did he answer Amen after the bracha of the congregation — he should not recite the bracha when he counts at night, lest it was already night when he counted during bein hashmashos and he has already fulfilled his obligation, according to those who say that mitzvos do not require intention. And even according to those who say that mitzvos require intention, nevertheless the counting nowadays is of Rabbinic origin, and some say that mitzvos of Rabbinic origin, according to all opinions, do not require intention, as was explained in siman 475.
And even if he did not count with them at all, but heard the counting from one person or from the congregation who counted, and that person did not intend at all to fulfill his obligation for him, and he too did not intend to fulfill his obligation with this hearing, but heard it innocently — he should not recite the bracha when he counts at night, for one who hears is like one who answers. And even if he was thinking, "I do not intend to fulfill my obligation with this counting," it is of no consequence according to those who say that mitzvos do not require intention at all, unless he thinks, "I intend not to fulfill my obligation with it"'.
He further wrote12: 'One whose friend asks him during bein hashmashos how many days of the counting it is tonight should tell him, "Yesterday was such-and-such," for if he tells him, "Today is such-and-such," he himself will not be able to go back and count with a bracha, since he has already fulfilled his obligation by what he told his friend, "Today is such-and-such," according to those who say that intention to fulfill the obligation is not required — even though he did not say "of the Omer," that makes no difference.
But the one who asks may count with a bracha even though he has already heard the count from the one who answered, since in any case, at the time he heard it he had in mind to go back and count, for that is why he is listening; it turns out that he had the explicit intention not to fulfill his obligation through this hearing. But the one who answers did not have in mind explicitly at the time of his answer that he wishes to go back and count again afterward — even though that is in fact so — nevertheless, since it was not explicitly in his mind, he has fulfilled his obligation according to those who say that intention is not required. However, if he did not tell him "Today is such-and-such," but simply answered him "such-and-such of the Omer," he has not fulfilled his obligation with this according to all opinions, and he should go back and count with a bracha. Nevertheless, it is better to say, "Yesterday was such-and-such"'.
If so, in practice: a. One must take care not to simply state that day's count before he has recited the bracha. b. If he hears his friend counting, he must have in mind that he does not wish to fulfill his obligation. And in a case where he did simply say it, or heard his friend and had no intention at all, (we are concerned for the opinions that intention is not required) and he cannot afterward recite the bracha and count again.
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 60, se'if 4 ↩
2 There, se'if katan 3 ↩
3 Orach Chaim, siman 475, se'if 4, and siman 489, se'if 4 ↩
4 Regarding the view of the Mechaber, the Pri Chadash wrote in that siman: 'Therefore it appears that the view of the Mechaber z"l is to distinguish between mitzvos of Torah origin and Rabbinic mitzvos, as I wrote above in siman 475, se'if 4'; however, the Machatzis HaShekel and the Pri Megadim there understood the words of the Mechaber as not distinguishing, in accordance with the plain meaning of his wording, that even with Rabbinic mitzvos intention is required ↩
5 Se'if 5 ↩
6 Se'if 29 ↩
7 Siman 475, se'if 29 ↩
8 There, siman 489, se'if 4 ↩
9 There, in se'if 3 ↩
10 This depends on the differing opinions regarding the view of the Mechaber: as mentioned above, according to the Pri Chadash — and so too according to the Elya Rabbah, se'if katan 12 — the Mechaber holds that with Rabbinic mitzvos intention is not required, and therefore he has fulfilled his obligation. However, according to the Magen Avraham (as explained in the Machatzis HaShekel and the Pri Megadim), the view of the Mechaber is that even with Rabbinic mitzvos intention is required to fulfill one's obligation. The reason that here, when he counted without specific intention, he should not recite the bracha again is because of the concern of a bracha l'vatalah; therefore he is concerned for the other opinions ↩
11 There, se'if 12 ↩
12 Se'if 14 ↩
[9] (Halacha 263)
The study of this halacha is l'iluy nishmas Harav Elazar Mordechai ben Harav Alexander Dovid Zusha Koenig z"l
Eating before Sefiras HaOmer (1)
Question: May one eat before the time of Sefiras HaOmer?
Answer: The Rema wrote1: 'And when the time has arrived, it is forbidden to eat until one counts'.
The Magen Avraham raised a difficulty2: 'This requires further study, for he should have said that half an hour before the time it is also forbidden, as is written in simanim 232 and 235. And it seems to me that this was the reason of the Maharshal3, who did not eat until after the counting: because people leave the shul half an hour close to bein hashmashos, and he holds that it is forbidden to eat; see the Mateh Moshe and the Shelah. And as for the view of the Rema, we must say that since one has time to count the entire night and the entire following day4, we are not so stringent. Nevertheless, this requires further study — from where does he derive this? Therefore one should be stringent. However, in a place where the custom is that the shammash calls out to count the counting, one need not be stringent before its time, as is written in siman 232, and it is possible that this is the case the Rema is discussing, and therefore he wrote "and when the time has arrived," etc.'5.
The Chok Yaakov explained6: 'And for this reason it is understood why the Rav did not write that half an hour before the time it is also forbidden to eat, as was explained above in simanim 232 and 235. According to what I have written it is understood, for it is unnecessary, since half an hour before, it is in any case forbidden on account of tefillah and Krias Shema in its proper time, at least, as is explained in siman 235. Rather, he needed to teach us that even though one has already davened and recited Krias Shema in its proper time, he nevertheless should not eat, since the time of the counting has arrived. All this seems to me simple and clear, and the Magen Avraham troubled himself needlessly to draw various distinctions on account of this difficulty'.
Summary of the matter: The Magen Avraham asked why the Rema wrote that it is forbidden to eat from the time of the counting onward, and did not mention that it is already forbidden to eat from half an hour before the time7. The Chok Yaakov answered that the Rema did not mention this because in any case it is forbidden to eat half an hour before the time of the counting, since it is also half an hour before Krias Shema, before which it is forbidden to eat.
However, we find that many communities had the custom to daven Maariv with Krias Shema early, while it is still day, before tzeis hakochavim, and afterward, at tzeis hakochavim or before going to sleep, to recite Krias Shema a second time. The question then arises: must they refrain from eating until they recite Krias Shema in its proper time the second time? On this the Magen Avraham wrote8: 'If he recited it in the shul while it was still day, he is permitted to eat before reciting it a second time at home'.
The Alter Rebbe explained this9: 'And this applies specifically to one who is always accustomed to intend to fulfill his obligation with the Krias Shema recited at bedtime, reciting two parshiyos'.
Accordingly, there can be a situation in which a person davened Maariv and recited Krias Shema early, but he is accustomed to intend to fulfill his obligation with the Krias Shema recited at bedtime; if so, from the standpoint of Krias Shema he is permitted to eat, but during the days of Sefiras HaOmer, from the standpoint of the counting, he is forbidden to eat.
On this basis the Alter Rebbe wrote10: 'And if his practice is to daven Maariv while it is still day and to recite all three parshiyos at bedtime — even though he is permitted to eat before the Krias Shema at bedtime, as was explained in siman 235 — nevertheless, during the days of the counting he should not begin to eat even a small seudah half an hour before the time of the counting, that is, half an hour before bein hashmashos. This is a decree lest he prolong his seudah and fail to count Sefiras HaOmer — unless it is a place where the custom is that the shammash calls out to count the counting when its time arrives, for then there is no concern that he will prolong his seudah, as was explained in siman 232.
If so, half an hour11 before sunset12 it is forbidden to eat, unless he has a watchman who will remind him to count when the time arrives.
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 4 ↩
2 There, se'if katan 11 ↩
3 Mateh Moshe, siman 664 ↩
4 The Pri Megadim remarked that during the day it is not considered its proper time, and therefore one counts without a bracha ↩
5 The Divrei Nechemiah answered: 'And the Rema too, it can be said, did not mean specifically "when it has arrived"; see the Kesef Mishneh, ch. 6 of Hilchos Tefillah, halacha 5, who wrote so regarding the Rambam, and there are many such instances' ↩
6 There, se'if katan 16 ↩
7 It should be noted that seemingly the Magen Avraham's intention is to say that the prohibition of eating should apply half an hour before sunset, in addition to the prohibition explained in siman 235, which is half an hour before tzeis hakochavim ↩
8 Siman 235, se'if katan 4 ↩
9 Orach Chaim, siman 267, se'if katan 1 ↩
10 Siman 489, se'if 17 ↩
11 And this is also the minhag of the Sephardim; see Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Sefiras HaOmer, se'if 31, who wrote: 'Half an hour before sunset one should not eat a seudah of more than a k'beitzah of bread (about sixty grams), even if he has davened Minchah, as long as he has not fulfilled the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer. And it is explained in the Acharonim that the prohibition is half an hour before the time of Sefiras HaOmer, and bein hashmashos is the time of Sefiras HaOmer. And so wrote the Shulchan Aruch HaGraz' ↩
12 It should be noted that Harav M. S. Ashkenazi (Kovetz Shoalin V'Dorshin 5774, p. 21) wrote regarding the view of the Alter Rebbe that the prohibition half an hour before sunset applies only according to their minhag, in which they davened Maariv and counted Sefiras HaOmer early (as explained in se'if 12), which is not so according to our minhag, in which we daven and count only at tzeis hakochavim; if so, the half hour is only before tzeis hakochavim. (And see the Mishnah Berurah, siman 489, se'if katan 23) ↩
[10] (Halacha 264)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of the newborn son of Nechama Dina, for a refuah shleimah
Eating before Sefiras HaOmer (2)
Question: If a person began eating before the time, and the time of the counting arrived, must he stop eating?
Answer: The Rema wrote1: 'And when the time has arrived, it is forbidden to eat until one counts. And even if he began to eat, he stops and counts. However, if he began to eat before the time arrived, he need not stop; rather, he finishes his eating and counts afterward (his own words, according to the view that the counting nowadays is of Torah origin)'.
The Chok Yaakov wrote2: '"He stops and counts" — because there is an opinion that the counting is of Torah origin. Even though shortly afterward, in se'if 6, the Rav ruled without qualification in accordance with the view of the Mechaber that one does not go back and recite the bracha — that is, because the Ran wrote that the view of most poskim is that the counting nowadays is Rabbinic, as explained in the Beis Yosef — nevertheless, the Rav ruled here to be stringent and to stop, for what does it matter if he stops briefly? This is not so below, where there is a concern of a bracha l'vatalah. And see the Nachalas Tzvi [se'if katan 6], who left the words of the Rav as requiring further study; but according to what I have written, there is no difficulty at all'.
On this basis the Alter Rebbe wrote3: 'During the days of the counting one should not begin to eat even a small seudah half an hour before the time of the counting, that is, half an hour before bein hashmashos. This is a decree lest he prolong his seudah and fail to count Sefiras HaOmer — unless it is a place where the custom is that the shammash calls out to count the counting when its time arrives, for then there is no concern that he will prolong his seudah, as was explained in siman 232.
(And even in places where this is not the custom, if he transgressed and began the seudah within the half hour close to the time of the counting, he need not stop in the middle of his seudah)
But if he began the seudah after the time of the counting had arrived, he must stop and count in the middle of his seudah, according to those who say that the counting nowadays is from the Torah, as was explained in siman 235. And even though the primary view is like those who say that the counting nowadays is of Rabbinic origin, nevertheless, in a matter that involves no bother at all — that is, to stop briefly and count — one should be concerned for the first view'.
If so, a person who at tzeis hakochavim recited Krias Shema and davened Maariv, but did not count Sefiras HaOmer (because he forgot or the like), and began to eat and then remembered that he had not counted, must stop and count. (Since this is a matter that involves no bother, we are concerned for the opinions that the obligation of the counting is of Torah origin)
Question: Is it permitted to eat after the time of the counting has arrived by appointing a watchman who will remind him, or when he has a fixed minyan for Maariv?
Answer: The Magen Avraham wrote4: 'However, in a place where the custom is that the shammash calls out to count the counting, one need not be stringent before its time, as is written in siman 232, and it is possible that this is the case the Rema is discussing, and therefore he wrote "and when the time has arrived," etc.'.
Some learned from the words of the Magen Avraham5 that once the time has arrived, he is forbidden to eat even if there is a watchman.
However, many6 ruled that one may rely on a watchman, and likewise there are Chabad rabbonim7 who wrote that even according to the view of the Alter Rebbe a watchman is effective even after the time of the counting. However, it is accepted among chassidim to be stringent and not to eat or drink from sunset until one actually counts (so Harav Moshe Slavaticki wrote to us in the name of R' Yossel Weinberg, who heard several times from the Rebbe Rayatz that in Lubavitch they were careful not to drink even water before the counting).
And likewise regarding a fixed minyan, they wrote8 that those who are lenient all year round to eat before the Krias Shema of Maariv on the basis of their fixed minyan may also eat before the counting.
In practice, l'chatchilah it is proper not to eat before the counting, but rather to count immediately at the proper time9; but where there is a need, one may rely on a watchman who will remind him to count, and likewise if he has a fixed late minyan, he may rely on that so that he will not forget
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 4 ↩
2 Se'if katan 17 ↩
3 Siman 489, se'if 17 ↩
4 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if katan 11 ↩
5 See Teshuvos V'Hanhagos vol. 1, siman 86; Halachos Chag B'Chag (Karp), Sefiras HaOmer, end of ch. 1; and see Piskei Teshuvos, siman 489, os 16, who understood this to be the view of the Alter Rebbe as well ↩
6 Shu"t Igros Moshe, Orach Chaim vol. 4, siman 99; Az Nidberu vol. 6, siman 52 ↩
7 Harav M. S. Ashkenazi in Kovetz Shoalin V'Dorshin 5774, p. 21 ↩
8 Igros Moshe, there. Az Nidberu, there. Halachos Chag B'Chag, there ↩
9 As the Alter Rebbe wrote in se'if 3: 'But l'chatchilah, the choicest way of performing the mitzvah is to count at the beginning of the night, immediately after the Maariv tefillah'; and see what is written in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch with Dover Shalom on this se'if, os 53 ↩
[11] (Halacha 265)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of the soldier in Tzivos Hashem, Shmuel Elazar ben Kayla, on the occasion of his birthday
Eating before Sefiras HaOmer (3)
Question: When one may eat on the basis that a watchman will remind him to count Sefiras HaOmer, may he use a cellphone as the watchman by setting it as an alarm clock?
Answer: The Nachalas Tzvi wrote1: 'And it appears in my humble opinion that if he told his friend to remind him of the search when it gets dark, he is permitted to learn, just as the Sages permitted learning on Shabbos night by a lamp if he says to his friend, "Pay attention to me so that I do not tilt it," as above in siman 275'. And so wrote the Eliyah Zuta in his name2: 'The Nachalas Tzvi wrote: it seems to me that if he tells his friend to remind him of the search when it gets dark, he is permitted to learn'.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe3:'If he is sitting and learning before tzeis hakochavim and tells his friend who is not learning that when the time of the search arrives he should remind him and they should stop him from his learning, this is permitted even if it is within half an hour before tzeis hakochavim'.
In the sefer Darkei HaShulchan4 he inferred from the fact that the Alter Rebbe added to the wording of the poskim the words 'and they should stop him from his learning': 'Seemingly, a mere reminder means only mentioning the hour, or mentioning that the time of bedikas chametz has arrived; but "he should stop him from his learning" means that he should tell him that now he must stop his learning. Accordingly, perhaps the intention is that merely reminding is not sufficient, since one who is engrossed in learning will not pay attention to it; rather, they must stop him from his learning, that is, tell him to stop learning and go search for the chametz. Accordingly, it would not help if he sets a clock or a telephone to ring at that hour, for that only reminds and does not stop him from his learning'.
Further on he wrote that there is indeed a possibility of explaining that the intention of the words "and they should stop him from his learning" is not the action of the watchman, but merely the result of the watchman's reminding: since the watchman will remind him that the time has arrived, he will consequently stop. If so, according to this an alarm clock and the like would be effective. In practice, however, he inclines to say that the words added by the Alter Rebbe do come to say that the watchman must make sure that he stops his learning; if so, according to him an alarm clock or a telephone would not be effective.
Some have written a different reason why an alarm clock cannot serve as a watchman: because the ringing merely makes noise and does not specifically remind one to daven or to count. And so wrote the Chut HaShani5: 'And it appears that a watchman is effective specifically when the watchman reminds him and informs him that he should daven; but if he sets an alarm clock or the like to ring after some time, and through this he will remember that he must daven, it does not help him as a watchman, since the watchman must remind him "to daven," and not a mere reminder of ringing at a certain hour, which does not tell him explicitly that he should daven'.
Similarly, Shu"t Mishneh Halachos was in doubt6: 'Regarding the law of an alarm clock, whether it is effective in place of a watchman — for example, one who eats before the Maariv tefillah, which is permitted by means of a watchman — whether such a clock, which he sets to ring in another half hour, is effective: I have already written about this that l'chatchilah one certainly should not rely on it, for even if he hears the ringing in another half hour, he will not pay attention to why it is ringing, since in the meantime he will forget that it is ringing for this purpose; but if he appointed a person, he tells him that he appointed him as a watchman. However, b'dieved, if he has no other way and he needs it, it is possible that he has not transgressed the enactment of Chazal; and this requires further study'.
And seemingly, even according to their words, when the reminder for the counting on the telephone has a distinct sound — and especially if the sound will be a spoken message "go count" or "go daven" — it will be possible to rely on it as a watchman.
However, most poskim7 wrote that an alarm clock is effective with the status of a watchman, but one must stop eating when the clock rings.
And some wrote8 even more than this: that even if we were to say that a watchman is not effective, an alarm clock would nevertheless be effective, for on the contrary, a clock is preferable to a person, since the clock does not forget to ring, whereas a person may forget to remind. Therefore a clock has the same status as a shammash, which we saw9 is effective since his job is to go around and remind people.
However10, with regard to sleep an alarm clock is not effective, for there is concern that after he wakes up he will turn it off, want to doze a bit more, and sink back into sleep.
If so, in practice the poskim have held that one may use an alarm clock as a watchman (but if he uses a cellphone, he must make sure that the device is charged as required).
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 431, se'if katan 1 ↩
2 Se'if katan 5 ↩
3 Siman 431, se'if 11 ↩
4 By Harav M. Blinov, siman 5, p. 33 (and it is from Paamei Yaakov 4, p. 13) ↩
5 Shabbos vol. 1, p. 215, os 7 ↩
6 Vol. 15, siman 16 ↩
7 See Shu"t Ohr L'Tzion vol. 2, ch. 15, note 8, who wrote that an alarm clock has the status of a watchman, and that he should accept upon himself to stop eating when the clock rings. And so wrote the Luach Yomi (by Harav Y. Braun), Pesach 5783, p. 26, note 145; Chashukei Chemed, Brochos 4, 4. And see also Yalkut Yosef, Hilchos Tefillah, siman 89, note 45/2 ↩
8 Yeshuos Chochmah, siman 70, os 2, se'if katan 22. Cited in Nitei Gavriel, Pesach vol. 3, ch. 26, note 7 ↩
9 In siman 489, se'if 18 ↩
10 Yeshuos Chochmah, there, se'if katan 28. Halichos Shlomo, ch. 2, os 12 ↩
[12] (Halacha 266)
The study of this halacha is l'iluy nishmas the mashbak, shochet u'bodek, Harav Dovber ben Reb Naftali Yunik z"l, on the occasion of his yahrtzeit
We learned1 the words of the Alter Rebbe that when a person counted or heard the counting of the Omer without intending to fulfill his obligation, we are concerned for the opinions that he fulfilled his obligation even without intention, and he cannot count again with a bracha — unless he had a contrary intention, that is, he intended not to fulfill it. Following this, we received the following question:
Question: Why does the congregation of worshippers, who hear the chazzan count, go on to recite the bracha themselves, rather than saying that since they heard the chazzan they have already fulfilled their obligation through him?
Answer: This question was already asked by the gaon and chassid, the author of the Divrei Nechemiah, in his glosses on this siman2: 'But seemingly this is difficult in light of what is done every day, that the congregation recites the bracha after hearing it from the shliach tzibbur (and see Magen Avraham, siman 619, end of se'if katan 3)'.
In Shu"t Yeshuas Moshe3 he wrote on this basis: 'Therefore it is proper for everyone who is meticulous to intend explicitly, as above, that he does not wish to fulfill his obligation either with the bracha of the chazzan or the Rav, or with his counting; and he should take care to answer "Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shemo", since this constitutes an interruption in the bracha4 through which one fulfills the obligation'.
However, the Yeshuas Moshe himself remarks that in practice people do not answer "Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shemo", nor do they warn that a contrary intention is needed in order not to fulfill the obligation through the chazzan.
In truth, though, the Divrei Nechemiah there already explained our minhag, writing: 'And we must say that the reason is that at the time of hearing, their explicit intention is to count by themselves immediately, as is customary, and this is similar to what will be explained in se'if 14 regarding the one who asks. This is not so when one hears innocently, etc. (and this requires further study regarding the case of the Rashba)'.
He is referring to what the Alter Rebbe wrote in se'if 14 regarding the one who asks: 'One whose friend asks him during bein hashmashos how many days of the counting it is tonight should tell him, "Yesterday was such-and-such," for if he tells him "Today is such-and-such," he himself will not be able to go back and count with a bracha, since he has already fulfilled his obligation by saying to his friend "Today is such-and-such," according to those who say that intention to fulfill the obligation is not required — even though he did not say "of the Omer," that makes no difference. But the one who asks may count with a bracha even though he has already heard the count from the one who answered, since in any case, at the time he heard it he had in mind to go back and count, for that is why he is listening; it turns out that he had the explicit intention not to fulfill his obligation through this hearing. But the one who answers did not have in mind explicitly at the time of his answer that he wishes to go back and count again afterward — even though that is in fact so — nevertheless, since it was not explicitly in his mind, he has fulfilled his obligation according to those who say that mitzvos do not require intention'.
On this basis the Divrei Nechemiah explained that just as the one who asks certainly does not fulfill his obligation, since his very question shows that he is defined as one who intends not to fulfill it through his friend who answers him, so too we view the congregation of worshippers, who wait for the chazzan to finish so that they may count by themselves: at the time of the chazzan's counting their intention is to go back and count by themselves, and this itself constitutes a contrary intention — that they do not intend to fulfill their obligation through the chazzan. This is unlike the friend who answered the question, who cannot count again, since the question came as a surprise to him and consequently he had no intention at all. Therefore, one who heard the counting unexpectedly has also fulfilled his obligation, since he had no contrary intention whatsoever.
This is along the lines of the words of the Alter Rebbe5: 'But) one who intended not to fulfill his obligation with the Havdalah in the shul — even the shliach tzibbur himself, if he intended not to fulfill his obligation with his own Havdalah — must go back and make Havdalah at home. Therefore the custom is that everyone goes back and makes Havdalah at home, even if all the members of his household were in the shul, since they have no intention at all to fulfill their obligation with the Havdalah in the shul'.
That is, the very fact that at the time of Havdalah their intention is to make Havdalah at home is as if they intended not to fulfill their obligation6.
Thus it has been explained that a person who hears the counting from someone else, and while hearing it had in mind to count by himself, this is considered a contrary intention, and he may count by himself with a bracha.
But in a case where he heard the counting from another person, or from a chazzan who is not of his minyan, and at the time of hearing he did not have in mind that he was going to count by himself, he cannot recite the bracha when he counts by himself afterward7.
Notes:
1 In Halacha 262 ↩
2 Printed at the end of the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, vol. 4 ↩
3 By Harav Y. M. Aronson, vol. 3, siman 49 ↩
4 It should be noted, however, that from the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, siman 124, se'if 2, it appears that whether saying "Baruch Hu u'Varuch Shemo" on a bracha is considered an interruption is only a doubt ↩
5 Orach Chaim, siman 296, se'if 17 ↩
6 See MiShulchan HaAri, pp. 75–76; Haaros Dover Shalom, siman 296, note 84 ↩
7 But note what is written in Haaros Dover Shalom there, siman 489, note 127: that when one hears the bracha of Sefiras HaOmer from the shliach tzibbur of an earlier minyan, in which he is not davening, and he is not listening to the shliach tzibbur's bracha, but this bracha merely reached his ears incidentally — in such a case we are not concerned, and b'dieved he may recite the bracha again. This is based on his understanding of the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, siman 213, se'if 4, in the parentheses; but see what is written in the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch HaMevuar, edition of Harav A. A., siman 213, note 56. This requires further study ↩
[13] (Halacha 267)
Question: Must one know the count before the bracha?
Answer: The Raavyah wrote1: 'Certainly, if he does not know the reckoning of the days, and his intention is to recite the bracha and to conclude according to what he will hear from the congregation or from his friend — for it was with this in mind that he began — and he paused before concluding until he heard how they concluded, and he too concluded in the same way after them, in such a case he certainly fulfills his obligation, since there is both a beginning and a conclusion'.
However, Rabbeinu Menachem ben Zerach wrote2: 'But if he began and recited the bracha with the intention of following what his friends will say, even though he does not know, he has fulfilled his obligation; but it is proper that he know at the outset what the count is'.
And on this basis the Mechaber wrote3: 'If he does not know the reckoning, and he began with the intention of concluding according to what he will hear from his friend, and he was silent until he heard it from his friend and concluded as he did, he has fulfilled his obligation'.
The Taz remarked4: 'This implies b'dieved, but l'chatchilah he should not recite the bracha until he has clarity, at the time of the bracha, as to what he must count afterward, as above'.
And although the Chok Yaakov wrote5: 'But people are accustomed to be lenient and rely on this even l'chatchilah, and to recite the bracha in such a manner, relying on what his friend will say'.
Nevertheless, the Pri Megadim wrote6: 'And l'chatchilah it is certainly proper that he know before the bracha what the count is'.
And so the Alter Rebbe wrote in practice7: 'If he does not know which day of the counting it is, and he began and recited the bracha with the intention of counting according to what he will hear from his friend, and after the bracha he was silent and heard it from his friend and counted as he did, he has fulfilled the obligation of the bracha, and he need not go back and recite the bracha a second time8 before his counting, even though at the time of the first bracha he did not know for which day he was reciting the bracha. But l'chatchilah one should not do so, and he should not recite the bracha until he knows which day of the counting it is, so that he knows on what he is reciting the bracha'9.
Thus, in practice, l'chatchilah one must know the count of that day at the time of the bracha; but b'dieved, even if at the time of the bracha he did not know the count, he has fulfilled his obligation.
Question: What else must one know before the counting?
Answer: The Rachu wrote10: 'Regarding the psalm Elokim Yechonenu, I saw that my teacher z"l was very particular to have in mind each day one letter of the 49 letters of the pasuk Yismechu Viyranenu, etc., and one word of the 49 words in this psalm — for tishpot is written full with a vav, le'umim lacking a vav, mishor full with a vav.
And although the Chok Yaakov11 wrote: 'And newcomers of late have come and printed the text of the counting according to the sod and the kavanos of the sefiros .. and this has spread in the eyes of the masses as though whoever wishes to take the Name may come and take it; but in truth "לא נאה לכסיל כבוד" ("honor is not fitting for a fool"), for "כבוד אלהים הסתר דבר" ("it is the glory of G-d to conceal a matter")'.
Yet the Yaavetz already wrote in his siddur12, regarding the kavanah on the aforementioned letters and words, that this practice has spread to the many.
And so the Alter Rebbe wrote in his siddur: 'He should have in mind the sefirah of that night, and one word of Ana Bekoach, and one word of the psalm Elokim Yechonenu, and one letter of the pasuk Yismechu'.
Thus these kavanos pertain to everyone, as the Rebbe wrote in the Haggadah shel Pesach13: 'Evidently this kavanah pertains to the many, since our Rebbe included it in his siddur .. even though in general he did not write the kavanos in his siddur — since it is equally accessible to every soul'.
The diaries record14 that it was observed that the Rebbe apparently looked, even before the bracha, at the count of the day and at the words and letters pertaining to that day15.
Notes:
1 Maseches Pesachim, siman 526 ↩
2 In his sefer Tzeidah LaDerech, maamar 4, klal 3, ch. 12 ↩
3 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if 5 ↩
4 Se'if katan 8 ↩
5 Se'if katan 18 ↩
6 Mishbetzos Zahav, se'if katan 8. 7Siman 489, se'ifim 18–19 ↩
7 This requires explanation, for the case here is that he heard it from his friend and already counted as he did; if so, what would one have thought — that he must go back and recite the bracha again? Therefore the Divrei Nechemiah explained in his glosses here: 'And we must say that what he wrote, "he has fulfilled his obligation," means the obligation of the bracha, and the practical difference is that he acted properly in not going back and reciting the bracha before he counted (and "he need not go back" means that he was not required, etc.)' ↩
8 And see Shaarei Tefillah U'Minhag by Harav M. S. Ashkenazi, p. 509, note 2193, who discusses whether one must also have the weeks in mind ↩
9 Pri Etz Chaim, Shaar Sefiras HaOmer, end of ch. 6 ↩
10 Si1 489, se'if katan 11 ↩
11 Shaar HaMifkad, Dinei Sefiras HaOmer, Mishol 2, os 18 ↩
12 With regard to the kavanos of the Name Havayah in "Hodu LaShem ki tov ki l'olam chasdo" ↩
13 Shaarei Tefillah U'Minhag, p. 510; Maaseh Melech, p. 216 ↩
14 And see Shaarei Tefillah U'Minhag, p. 509, which argues at length that according to the words of the Alter Rebbe in the siddur, the time for the kavanah of these letters is also before the bracha — that is, the bracha must be for the sake of the counting and the aforementioned kavanos (and not as the plain meaning of the words of the Mishnas Chassidim, Maseches HaOmer, ch. 8, mishnah 2, that the kavanah is at the time of reciting the psalm); but see the Alter Rebbe's Siddur with the notes of Harav Raskin, p. 627 ↩
[14] (Halacha 268)
The study of this halacha is dedicated in the merit of Chaya Mushka bas Devorah Leah שתחי', on the occasion of her reaching the age of mitzvos.
Question: Does a minor who became bar mitzvah during the days of the counting continue to count Sefiras HaOmer with a bracha?
Answer: The Birkei Yosef wrote1: 'A minor who came of age during the days of the Omer .. all of these count the remaining days without a bracha. Harav Maharam Mizrachi, in Shu"t Pri HaAretz, vol. 3, manuscript, siman 7'.
And so wrote Shu"t Avnei Nezer2: 'And so the Rambam wrote (ch. 6 of Hilchos Chametz U'Matzah, halacha 3): "If he ate a kezayis of matzah while he was an epileptic in a state of derangement, and afterward he was cured, he is obligated to eat after he is cured, since that eating took place at a time when he was exempt from the mitzvos." It is evident that a mitzvah performed at a time when one was exempt from the mitzvos is not a mitzvah at all. So too, the counting that he counted as a minor is not considered counting. And it then depends on the dispute among the poskim whether, if one did not count one day, he is obligated to count the remaining days, and he counts without a bracha'.
Likewise, the Tziyunim LaTorah3 cites, in the name of the author of the Chiddushei HaRim of Gur, that he was doubtful regarding a minor who came of age, whether he may continue with a bracha. And so wrote Shu"t Yechaveh Daas in practice4.
However, the Shaarei Teshuvah5 wrote on the words of the Birkei Yosef in the name of the Pri HaAretz: 'And what he wrote regarding a minor does not apply to us, for minors who have reached the age of chinuch also count, and all the more so a mufla samuch l'ish; and if he did not count until he came of age, and some of the days of the Omer have already passed, it is obvious that he does not recite the bracha6'.
And so the poskim attested7 that in practice the minhag is that a minor who counted as a minor and came of age continues to count with a bracha even after the bar mitzvah.
Thus we have seen that the actual minhag is that a minor who came of age during Sefiras HaOmer continues to count with a bracha, and so most of the poskim ruled in practice8
In explaining why — even though he was not obligated by Torah law — his status is nevertheless not like one who missed a day, who does not recite the bracha, the Acharonim gave several reasons. Among them: that the Rabbinic obligation counts toward the Torah obligation of counting as well, as the Minchas Chinuch wrote9: 'Certainly the time during which he is obligated Rabbinically is effective for him to be obligated afterward by Torah law, and the count is not nullified'. Or, that even though it was while he was exempt, it is considered counting, and there is no deficiency in the count of the days, as Shu"t Har Tzvi wrote10: 'Since in practice he counted each and every day, even though he was exempt, nevertheless we may properly call them temimos, only that he was exempt from the mitzvah; but from the time he became obligated he is obligated for the remaining days, since there is no deficiency of temimos here'.
The Rebbe discussed this question in sichos many times, citing the discussions and reasonings of the Acharonim and explaining it in several ways, as follows:
1. The Rabbinic obligation of chinuch that he had at the beginning of the days of the counting, as a minor, remains upon him even after he becomes bar mitzvah, until the end of the days of the counting11.
2. There are mitzvos for which a minor has a Torah obligation to prepare, in order to fulfill the mitzvah properly after he comes of age; similarly, in our case, he is obligated to begin counting even before the bar mitzvah, and therefore this is effective by Torah law for the continuation of the counting12.
3.The Rabbinic mitzvah upon him as a minor to count gives his counting the status of a reality13.
4. 'It seems more correct to say… that anyone who became obligated in Sefiras HaOmer in the middle of the days of the counting may count with a bracha, for the counting of the days that he counted before the time of obligation — even though it is not a mitzvah — is a reality in the world, and therefore he may properly recite the bracha and count'. That is, the very fact that there is a command in the Torah to count these days makes these days and their counting a reality, even if he is not obligated14.
In Shu"t Mishneh Halachos15 he wrote a fine allusion: 'And as the halacha in practice I concluded that a minor may complete the count, and I alluded to this in the verse "חנוך לנער ע״פ דרכו" ("Train a youth according to his way") — that is, while he is still a minor — "וגם כי יזקין אל יסיר ממנו" ("and even when he grows old he will not depart from it"): "grows old" means that he attains the status of a zaken, one who has acquired wisdom, that is, he passes from being a minor to being an adult. And which mitzvah has a continuation from his minority to his adulthood? Sefiras HaOmer; and it says he will not depart from it'.
Notes:
1 Orach Chaim, siman 489, se'if katan 20 ↩
2 Orach Chaim, siman 539 ↩
3 Klal 12 ↩
4 Vol. 3, siman 29 ↩
5 Siman 489, se'if katan 20 ↩
6 And so wrote the Tzitz Eliezer, vol. 14, siman 55: 'It can be said that the Birkei Yosef is speaking of a case where he had not yet counted at all beforehand, similar to a ger who converted during the days of the Omer .. And I looked into the actual words of the sefer Pri HaAretz — in the printed edition it is siman 1 — and I saw his lengthy discussion of this, and I came to realize that there too there is not a word mentioned that the case is even where he had already counted beforehand'. On the other hand, the Yechaveh Daas there wrote that it is obvious that the words of the Pri HaAretz apply even where he counted as a minor ↩
7 See Tziyunim LaTorah there, who wrote: And on this basis one can justify the common minhag that those who become bar mitzvah during the days of the counting do not stop counting with a bracha afterward as well'. And see also Shu"t Tzitz Eliezer, vol. 14, siman 55 ↩
8 Shu"t Ksav Sofer, siman 99. Shu"t Maharam Schick, siman 269. Shu"t Minchas Elazar, vol. 3, siman 60. Aruch HaShulchan, siman 489, se'if 15. Kaf HaChaim, siman 489, se'if katan 94. Shu"t Lehoros Nosson, vol. 1, siman 206. Shu"t Or LeTziyon, vol. 1, siman 36 ↩
9 Parshas Emor, mitzvah 306, os 1 ↩
10 Orach Chaim, vol. 2, siman 76 ↩
11 Toras Menachem, vol. 78, 6 Tishrei 5735, p. 61; and see Tziyunim LaTorah, klal 12, and Or LeTziyon there ↩
12 Likkutei Sichos, vol. 26, p. 76; but see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 35, p. 64 ff. ↩
13 Likkutei Sichos, vol. 1, Emor, p. 270 ff.; but see Likkutei Sichos, vol. 8, Naso, p. 55; and see also Likkutei Sichos, vol. 38, p. 12, where it is suggested that since a Rabbinic mitzvah is upon the person (gavra) and not upon the object (cheftza), the counting cannot be considered a reality with regard to the Torah law; and also according to the halacha that the main counting is Rabbinic, there is a difference between a single Rabbinic factor and a double Rabbinic factor ↩
14 Likkutei Sichos, vol. 38, there ↩
15 Vol. 11, siman 398 ↩
[15] (Halacha 1081)
Question; What is the source for the minhag not to wear new clothes during the days of the counting?
Answer: In the sefer Teshuvos U'Piskei Chachmei Ashkenaz1 it is cited: 'Rav Sherira Gaon wrote .. the Sages decreed not to make celebrations between Pesach and Atzeres, and not to make a new garment until Shavuos'.
This minhag is also mentioned in the Leket Yosher2: 'And he said that in Austria it is permitted to buy a new garment on Lag BaOmer in order to wear it for the Yom Tov, and once it has been bought it is permitted to make it up even after Lag BaOmer. But for himself he would not make up garments for the Yom Tov until after Rosh Chodesh Sivan. And on Lag BaOmer itself it is permitted to put on anything new; but to put on even a new linen cap he would not permit during the Omer, even if one has no cap. Shoes, however, he would permit putting on during the Omer if one has none. And he did not want to permit me to turn my coat inside out after Lag BaOmer before Rosh Chodesh Sivan'.
And in Sefer HaTadir by Rabbeinu Moshe ben Reb Yekusiel of Rome3 he wrote: 'And people are also careful not to wear new clothes, because during those days the students of Rabbi Akiva died, and the wicked are judged in Gehinnom during those days .. and therefore the Sages, peace be upon them, decreed not to make celebrations and not to inaugurate a new garment or new clothing until Lag LaOmer'.
And likewise in the sefer Minhag Tov4 he wrote: 'And it is a good minhag not to take a haircut and not to inaugurate a garment or anything new .. from after Pesach until Atzeres, in honor of the chassidim, the wholehearted and the upright who gave up their lives for the sanctification of the Name; but on Lag BaOmer all of these are permitted because of the miracle that occurred, and from Lag BaOmer until Atzeres the stringency remains in place'.
And in the Yosef Ometz5 he wrote: 'The prohibition of shaving and of wearing new clothes is observed only from Rosh Chodesh Iyar onward. And although the Shulchan Aruch writes "until Rosh Chodesh Iyar," nevertheless the Maharil writes "before Rosh Chodesh," and consequently in the wording of the Shulchan Aruch "until" means "until but not including"'.
And in the Mekor Chaim6 he wrote: 'I have not found a prohibition against wearing a new garment; nevertheless the custom is to refrain, except for the participants in a bris and a bride who were in mourning'.
And in Minhagei Vermaiza7 it is written: 'New clothes are not worn [between Pesach and Atzeres] except on Lag BaOmer'.
However, there were poskim who had not seen all of the above and wrote that there is no source for this minhag, as written in the Orchos Yosher8: 'What people say, that one should not make new clothes during the days of the Omer, is women's talk, for we have not found this stringency in any posek. And if it is because of rejoicing — let us not add, for they said only not to make extra celebrations with dancing and circle dances'.
> Thus we have seen that some have written that the minhag is not to make [buy or wear] new clothes during the days of the counting.
[However, some of the poskim linked this minhag to the minhag of not saying Shehecheyanu during these days (which we will see in the next halacha), as written in the Pachad Yitzchak9: 'And Harav Mah Tov wrote: We cannot explicitly prohibit buying new items during the days of the Omer, for neither the early nor the later poskim were stringent in this matter. I have seen only this, in the books of the authors of derashos, that Shehecheyanu is not said during the days of the Omer; therefore, regarding items of slight value, to sew and to buy new ones, we may be lenient10, and regarding items to which Shehecheyanu applies one should be stringent until Lag BaOmer'. And in the sefer Ikarei HaDat11 he wrote: 'And in the places where I have lived, they were not careful at all not to recite Shehecheyanu during the days of the counting; consequently it follows that if we approach the matter from the reason of Shehecheyanu, there is also no need to be concerned about buying new items. And I have already been asked about this here in Florence and in other places, and I did not hesitate to permit it for even a slight need, and this is obvious'. But in the sources of the above minhag it does not appear to be specifically because of the bracha of Shehecheyanu12.]
> Thus we have seen that some have the custom not to make, buy or wear new clothes during the days of the counting, [and some wrote that this depends on the minhag of not saying Shehecheyanu during these days13, which we will see in the next halacha], and it appears that today many have the custom not to wear new clothes during the days of the Omer14. Regarding buying, there is more room to be lenient15 in a case of need or loss.
--------------
Notes:
1 Siman 69 ↩
2 Orach Chaim, p. 98, inyan 1 ↩
3 P. 222 ↩
4 Os 61 ↩
5 Siman 845 ↩
6 Siman 493, se'if 3 ↩
7 By Rabbi Y. Shamash, siman 93 ↩
8 By Harav Y. Molcho, end of ch. 11 ↩
9 Erech Omer ↩
10 And see also the sefer Moed Lechol Chai (by Rav Chaim Palagi), siman 6, os 12. And so he wrote in his sefer Yafeh LaLev, siman 493, se'if katan 7. (But it is possible that he intends only to indicate the type of garment, and not that it is because of the bracha of Shehecheyanu ↩
11 Orach Chaim, siman 21 ↩
12 Especially since there is no clear early source for the minhag of not saying Shehecheyanu (as we will see in the next halacha), and it is difficult to hang a matter that has a source on one that has none. And see also Shu"t Levushei Mordechai (fourth edition, siman 153): 'As for what you wrote, that people are accustomed not to wear a new garment during the days of the counting, and it is not found in any posek, early or later — I have already discussed this with talmidei chachamim, and I know that in the upper region they are stringent about this, but in these regions some are stringent and some are lenient for this reason. But *what his honor wrote, that it is because of the bracha of Shehecheyanu, I do not know where its source is,* for in most years the cherries — what are called "kirshen" or "weichsel" — have already ripened, and Shehecheyanu is recited on them, even though it would be possible to wait until the days of restriction ..' ↩
13 Regarding the bracha of Shehecheyanu on new clothes, there are opinions among the poskim as to the time of the bracha, whether it is at the time of buying or of wearing. And see also the words of the Alter Rebbe: in Luach Birchas HaNehenin he wrote to recite the bracha at the time of wearing, and in Seder Birchas HaNehenin he wrote at the time of buying; this is not the place to elaborate. And if the prohibition of new clothes depends on the bracha of Shehecheyanu, then it can be said that whether the minhag also includes not buying depends on this ↩
14 And also regarding sewing a new garment, it is proper to be stringent for those who have the custom not to make anything new in clothing during these days ↩
15 And see note 13. It is possible that today, especially because of return policies allowing products to be returned for some time after purchase, the main joy is in the wearing (and therefore it is less fitting to recite the bracha on the purchase), and therefore wearing is more stringent. And see along these lines in the Kaf HaChaim (siman 551, os 88) regarding Bein HaMetzarim: 'However, what the Eliyahu Rabbah wrote there — that the case is where he bought a finished garment before the 17th of Tammuz, since he recites the bracha at the time of buying, and according to this it is forbidden to buy a finished garment during Bein HaMetzarim, see there — see above, siman 223, os 30, where we wrote that the minhag is to recite the bracha specifically at the time of wearing, see there; and according to this it can be said that it is permitted to buy a finished garment even after the 17th of Tammuz, since the minhag is not to recite Shehecheyanu at the time of buying'. And also according to today's minhag of not reciting the bracha, nevertheless, since the essence of the minhag does not depend on the bracha but on the joy, then, as above, the joy is generally not in the buying itself but in the novelty of wearing ↩
[16] (Halacha 1082)
Saying Shehecheyanu during the days of the counting
In the previous halacha we saw that some Acharonim wrote that the minhag not to wear new clothes during Sefiras HaOmer stems from the minhag not to say Shehecheyanu during the counting.
Question: Is there in fact an early source for the minhag not to say Shehecheyanu during the days of the counting?
Answer: Rabbeinu Yerucham wrote1: 'And as for why zman is not said — some say it is because there is no benefit or joy here, as in a pidyon who has passed out of the category of a nefel, or as with new produce; and this indicates judgment to those who understand, for the Omer comes from barley .. and it is the offering of the sotah, which comes from barley, from the expression "the storm (se'aras) of Hashem"; and therefore people do not marry and they let the moustache grow'.
The Eliyahu Zuta2 cited it, in these words: 'And in Sefer Adam V'Chavah, page 44, he wrote that zman is not said during the counting because they are days of judgment, for the Omer comes from barley; and therefore people do not marry and do not take haircuts. End quote'.
The poskim discussed the words of Rabbeinu Yerucham — whether he means that Shehecheyanu is not recited during the days of the Omer3 (as seemingly implied by the words of the Eliyahu Zuta above), or whether he means that Shehecheyanu is not recited on the mitzvah of Sefiras HaOmer.
And some wrote that there is no proof at all from his words, and wrote that no source is found in the words of the Geonim and Rishonim for the minhag of not saying Shehecheyanu during these days4.
However, in the sefer Olelos Ephraim, by the author of the Kli Yakar5, he too wrote: '.. In this counting as a whole we find three weighty reasons. The first has already been explained: that they correspond to the days of a person's lifetime, and therefore we diminish rejoicing in them, for so said Shlomo: "לשחוק אמרתי מהולל ולשמחה מה זו עושה" ("Of laughter I said, 'It is mad,' and of joy, 'What does it accomplish?'"), and a person has no joy in this world except in "פיקודי ה׳ ישרים המשמחים לב" ("the precepts of Hashem, which are upright, gladdening the heart"). Therefore the custom is to rejoice somewhat on Lag BaOmer, an allusion to which is "גל עיניי והבית נפלאות מתורתך" ("Open my eyes, that I may behold wonders from Your Torah") .. And because this counting corresponds to the days of his lifetime, therefore Shehecheyanu is not recited during it, since all his days are pains .. and he is not secure from death on any day. But on Atzeres, the day of the receiving of the Torah, of which it is said "כי היא חייך" ("for it is your life"), he concludes; then Shehecheyanu is recited'.
And plainly the intent of his words is that Shehecheyanu is not said during the days of the counting6.
And we already saw in the previous halacha several of the Acharonim who wrote that although there is no clear source, in practice many have the custom not to say Shehecheyanu, as written in the Pachad Yitzchak7: '.. I have seen only this, in the books of the authors of derashos, that Shehecheyanu is not said during the days of the Omer'.
And so too is our minhag, as written in Hayom Yom8: 'The custom is not to recite Shehecheyanu during the days of Sefiras HaOmer'.
> Shabbos and Lag BaOmer
Question: According to the Chabad minhag, may one recite Shehecheyanu on Shabbos or on Lag BaOmer?
Answer: At the yechidus of the Chief Rabbis on 11 Iyar 57499 the Rebbe said: 'Among us the custom is that during the days of the counting Shehecheyanu is not recited on a new fruit, except on Shabbos and on Lag BaOmer. However, those who have the custom to recite it even during the days of the counting — certainly one should not prevent them, since that is their custom; on the contrary, let them continue and recite it'10.
> Thus, according to our minhag, Shehecheyanu is not recited during the days of the counting, but on Shabbosos and on Lag BaOmer it is recited. And those who have the custom to recite it — on the contrary, let them continue their minhag.
--------------
Notes:
1 Toldos Adam V'Chavah, nesiv 5, part 4, 44:4 ↩
2 Siman 493, se'if katan 1 ↩
3 Some sought to prove that he does not mean the Shehecheyanu on Sefiras HaOmer, since afterward he writes once again: 'Sefiras HaOmer — Shehecheyanu is not recited on Sefiras HaOmer, even though it is a mitzvah that comes from time to time ..'. However, this proof can be rejected, since the preceding passage, in which he writes that zman is not said because it is a time of judgment, is — as brought at the end of the passage — 'until here, it is not from the sefer'; if so, there is no question as to why the discussion of saying Shehecheyanu on the counting is repeated. Likewise, some noted that in another manuscript of Rabbeinu Yerucham it appears clearly that he means saying Shehecheyanu on the counting. And see on all this in the Gilyonos Or Torah, Iyar and Sivan 5767, and elsewhere ↩
4 And see Maamar Mordechai, siman 493, se'if katan 2: 'I was asked whether one need be concerned about what some have the custom to be particular about — not to recite Shehecheyanu from Pesach until Lag LaOmer — and whether this has a reason at its root or whether it is a mistaken minhag. And I replied that from the day I came of understanding I was not concerned about this, for I did not find it in any book, early or later, and there is no doubt that this minhag crept in from what is written in the Shulchan Aruch below, siman 551, se'if 17, that it is good to be careful not to say Shehecheyanu during Bein HaMetzarim on a fruit or a garment. End quote .. Now, the matter is well established that this reason applies also from Pesach until Lag BaOmer, for they too are days of sorrow and mourning, for which reason the custom is not to marry and not to take haircuts during them; and there is room at the outset to say that it applies all the more so, for there they forbade haircuts only in the week in which Tishah B'Av falls, and marrying is forbidden only from Rosh Chodesh until after Tishah B'Av, as explained there in se'if 2 and se'if 12; and although the Rema z"l wrote there to be stringent from the 17th of Tammuz, nevertheless according to the Mechaber z"l it is fully permitted — and even so he wrote that one should be careful not to say Shehecheyanu from the 17th of Tammuz; if so, all the more so here, where it is forbidden to take haircuts and to marry, one should be careful not to say Shehecheyanu. This is what appears to be the reason for the minhag. Nevertheless, my opinion inclines to say that there is no need to be concerned about it, since we have not found this in any book, for it is impossible that no posek, early or later, would have come to write so. Therefore it appears that one cannot learn from there to here, for it can be said that the destruction of the Beis HaMikdash is more severe for us, since there they were stringent in several matters; and if we came to equate the days of the Omer to there, we would have to equate them in every respect, and that is certainly not so. We have only what the Sages said, and in the place where they said it. And it seems to me that this is not an established minhag, and therefore one need not be concerned about it; and one may properly rely on Harav the Taz and Harav Y. of Cracow z"l, who disagreed there in Hilchos Tishah B'Av on the very basis of this law and wrote to permit reciting Shehecheyanu on any day between the 17th of Tammuz and Tishah B'Av, for perhaps he will die before he merits to recite this bracha — see there. And although there we do not rule like them but rather according to the ruling of Maran and the other Acharonim z"l, nevertheless let us not add to it, as above. This is correct, and so is my practice: not to refrain from reciting Shehecheyanu before Lag BaOmer on fruits and kinds of legumes that appear anew at that time'. And so wrote many more of the Acharonim; see the sources noted in Yabia Omer, vol. 3, siman 26, and in Yechaveh Daas, vol. 1, siman 24 ↩
5 2, 107 ↩
6 And seemingly it is difficult to explain his words as meaning, as above, Shehecheyanu on Sefiras HaOmer ↩
7 Erech Omer ↩
8 24 Nissan, and from there to Sefer HaMinhogim, p. 43 ↩
9 Toras Menachem, vol. 3, p. 134 ↩
10 The Rebbe was asked about this at the seudah on the night of Chag HaShavuos 5729 (Toras Menachem, vol. 56, pp. 220–221; HaMelech BiMesibo, vol. 1, p. 317) — why, regarding Sefiras HaOmer, nothing was written about Shabbosos as well. In response to the question regarding saying the bracha of Shehecheyanu during the days of the counting and during Bein HaMetzarim — that regarding Bein HaMetzarim, Sefer HaMinhogim (p. 46) states: 'We are careful not to say Shehecheyanu .. not even on Shabbos', whereas regarding the days of the counting it is not specified what the custom is on Shabbos — the Rebbe שליט"א said: This is what my father-in-law, the Rebbe, instructed to write — that 'Shehecheyanu is not recited during the days of Sefiras HaOmer' (and I did not ask about Shabbos, although had I asked, he would have answered me). And it should be noted that the entire matter of not reciting Shehecheyanu during the days of the counting is a novelty (unlike Bein HaMetzarim). And as for not cutting the hair — according to what is explained in the Pri Etz Chaim, it is understood that this is not on account of mourning, but on account of the matter of the dinim, etc. ↩
From the 'Shone Halacha' project - a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (quiet) group: 'Shone Halacha - Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group