Reciting Leshem Yichud
[A] (halacha 315)
Question: What is the source and reason for saying "L'shem Yichud" before performing mitzvos?
Answer: a) The source of the matter:
The matter of saying "L'shem Yichud" is founded on the holy Zohar1: 'אמר ר' אלעזר בכל עובדוי דבר נש לבעי ליה דלהוון כלהו לשמא קדישא מאי לשמא קדישא לאדכרא בפומיה שמא קדישא על כל מה דאיהו עביד דכלא הוא לפולחניה, ולא ישרי עלוי סטרא אחרא בגין דאיהו זמין תדירא לגבי בני נשא ויכיל לאשראה על ההוא עבידתא'2. [=R' Elazar said: in all of a person's deeds, they should all be for His holy Name, and what is meant by "for His holy Name"? To mention His holy Name with one's mouth in all that he does, for all is for His service, and the Sitra Achra should not rest upon him, for it is always present alongside human beings and can rest upon the deed that one performs].
And based on this the mekubalim wrote that there is a great matter in saying "L'shem Yichud" before every mitzvah:
The Reishis Chochmah3 [cited by the Shelah4] elaborated on this and wrote: 'And as a general rule for all the unifications of the Shechinah .. before performing that unification one must say with his mouth and utter with his lips "this thing or this mitzvah I am doing to unite the Shechinah with the Holy One, blessed be He," and he should intend in the unification יאקדונק"י, and he should intend that through this it will be elevated from the exile. How so? When he goes to the synagogue for Shacharis he should say "Behold, I am going to unite the Shechinah with the Holy One, blessed be He, in the right arm," and he should intend the intention we explained, and similarly for the other tefillos and mitzvos .. and thus he fulfills the act of speech and thought, which corresponds to the three names יב"ק'.
And so too wrote the Arizal5: 'And therefore, before one performs a mitzvah or tzedakah, one must say, "L'yachda shema d'Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei bidchilu urchimu, to join י"ה with ו"ה in the name of all Israel"'.
And so too wrote the Alter Rebbe6: 'And therefore we say before every mitzvah "L'shem Yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei." Kudsha Brich Hu is called that which is holy and separated from the category of worlds, and no thought can grasp Him, and the nullification of comprehension. And Shechintei is the Shechinah of His might and His kingship that clothes itself within the category of worlds to give them life and to bring them into being from nothing to something. This unification is accomplished through the mitzvah, which is in physical action, the category of "something," and through it supernal holiness is drawn down so that the "something" becomes nullified to nothing, and behold they are included and unified in a complete and true unification.
b) The reason for the saying:
a. It is a great principle that mitzvos require intention, that the performance of mitzvos should be for the sake of the mitzvah, and even according to the opinions that intention is not indispensable, it is certainly proper a priori that the performance of the mitzvah be for the sake of the mitzvah, and saying the text of "L'shem Yichud" before performing the mitzvah expresses that the deed is with intention for the mitzvah. [And although for the sake of intention there is no obligation to verbalize it with the mouth, nevertheless they instituted that one fulfill the mitzvah with the act of speech and thought as per the words of the Reishis Chochmah above].
And as he wrote in the Yosef Ometz7: 'And likewise one is obligated to say before every performance of a mitzvah, in the manner of Kabbalah. And he gains through this that thereby he will intend to fulfill the mitzvah, for according to the one who holds that mitzvos require intention, one does not fulfill it unless he intends to fulfill it, and even according to the one who holds that mitzvos do not require intention, nevertheless the difference between one who intends and one who does not intend is plain, and let it be no more than a doubt, and a doubt in a Torah matter is treated stringently, and so too it is written in the Sefer Chareidim'.
And in the No'am Elimelech8: 'Both the thought and the speech must both be one in holiness and in purity, that is to say, if he thinks to do a mitzvah he must also utter with his mouth in his speech that he wishes to do this mitzvah and say "L'shem Yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei." And this is the meaning of the verse "לֹא עַל הַלֶּחֶם לְבַדּוֹ יִחְיֶה הָאָדָם כִּי עַל כָּל מוֹצָא פִי ה' יִחְיֶה הָאָדָם" ("Not by bread alone does man live, but by all that comes forth from the mouth of Hashem does man live"), meaning that by what he brings forth from his mouth that he does for the sake of Hashem, "man lives," this is the essential vitality of a person'.
And to note from the language of the Alter Rebbe9, who after explaining the matter of the "L'shem Yichud," adds: 'And this is what they said, "mitzvos require intention," meaning the mitzvos themselves without intention are like a body without a soul, for the intention is the aspect of the light and vitality of the physical deed, like a soul which is the vitality of the body ..'.
b. And the primary reason for the saying is to indicate that through the mitzvos we unify the Holy One, blessed be He [=Z"A] and the Shechinah [=Malchus], and as the Alter Rebbe explains10: 'For behold the entire essence of the matter of the performance of the mitzvos is to be, through them, the unification of the Name Havayah and Elokim as above, and this is what we say before every mitzvah when performing it, "L'shem Yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei." For behold the root of the mitzvos, their foundations are in the supernal holy mountains in the aspect of the "Ayin" of Atzilus, but they clothed themselves below in physical matters such as the mitzvos of terumos and ma'asros and tzedakah in the inanimate and the growing and the like, so that through this there be the aspect of the nullification of the "something" to nothing, for behold the thing through which the mitzvah is done, the aspect of "Ayin" is drawn into it, and also the primary intention of the deed must be in the aspect of the nullification of will as the saying "nullify your will before His will etc.," and both in a positive commandment and in a negative commandment it is all only the aspect of nullification of will alone, to subdue his material heart beneath the supernal holiness as is known, and being so, this is the reason that one says before performing the mitzvah "L'shem Yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei," because through the mitzvah there is accomplished above the supernal unification of Havayah and Elokim as above, which is called Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei.
Therefore we have learned the source of the text of "L'shem Yichud," and the reasons for saying it. Tomorrow we will learn the opinion of those who reject saying it, and the various minhogim.
Notes:
1 תזריע נא, ב ↩
2 וראה מ"ש בראשית חכמה שער האהבה פ"ט לבאר דברי הזוהר ↩
3 שער האהבה שם ↩
4 שער האותיות אות אל"ף - אמת ואמונה ↩
5 פע"ח שער הזמירות ספ"ה. וראה הנסמן בסה"מ מלוקט ח"ב ע' פב הערה 60 ↩
6 לקו"ת דברים נה, ג ↩
7 ח"א, סי' ה ↩
8 פרשת בא ד"ה או יאמר ואם ימעט הבית ↩
9 סה"מ תקס"ח ע' תיז ↩
10 סה"מ תקסח שם ↩
[B] (halacha 316)
Question: Why did some of the great ones of Israel oppose saying "L'shem Yichud"?
Answer: We learned in the previous halacha that the merits of saying the "L'shem Yichud" are that thereby: a. His deed will be with intention for the sake of performing the mitzvah. [And it joins the act of the mitzvah with speech and thought]. b. To indicate the unification of Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei that is in the mitzvah.
However, the Noda BiYehuda1 wrote sharply against saying the "L'shem Yichud," and his reasons: a) An ordinary performance of a mitzvah is for its own sake [and there is no need to say "L'shem Yichud" to join the speech, for the Sages instituted the brochos for this purpose. And indeed, in a matter that has no bracha, he did practice saying that he is doing this for the sake of a mitzvah, but not in the text of "L'shem Yichud"]. b) All the rectifications above in the supernal realms are accomplished by themselves through our deeds. And these are his words: 'Our mitzvos are kodashim, they are the kodashim of the Most High, and by default they stand for their own sake, and what he brought from Nedarim he brought only to show that thought without speech is nothing, but a deed in a matter that by default is for its own sake requires no assistance. .. And how much concern for "cutting the plantings" as we have seen all this by clear proof — it is obvious that one should abolish it entirely, that he should not intend at all, and it is sufficient that he does the mitzvah for the sake of the mitzvah.
And as for what his honor wrote, that it is good for there to be a firm bond in speech and thought and deed. Behold, the men of the Great Assembly, they instituted for us tefillos and brochos, and there is nothing that is not hinted at in the text of the tefillah and the bracha, and a bracha is the arousal of speech and thought, and every mitzvah that has a bracha before it, one need not say anything before it but the bracha. And every matter that has no bracha before it, I practice saying with my mouth "Behold, I am doing this thing to fulfill the mitzvah of my Creator," and with this it is sufficient and no more is needed. And the intention is only the meaning of the words, and all the rectifications above are accomplished by themselves through our deeds'.
And therefore he wrote: 'As to what you asked regarding the text of "L'shem Yichud" .. before you ask me about the text of its saying, it would be more fitting to ask whether we may say that saying it is good. And in my opinion this is a grievous illness in our generation, and regarding the generations before our time who did not know of this text and did not say it and toiled all their days in Torah and mitzvos, all in accordance with the Torah and in accordance with the poskim whose words flow from the source of living waters, the sea of the Talmud — of them it is said "the integrity of the upright shall guide them," and they, they are the ones who produced fruit above and their kindness reaches above the heavens. But in this generation of ours, since they have abandoned the Torah of Hashem and the source of living waters, the two Talmuds, Bavli and Yerushalmi, to hew for themselves broken cisterns, and they exalt themselves in the loftiness of their hearts, each one saying "I am the seer, and to me the gates of heaven have been opened, and for my sake the world endures" — these are the destroyers of the generation. And of this orphaned generation I say "the ways of Hashem are upright, and the righteous shall walk in them, but transgressors shall stumble in them." And I would have much to say about this, but just as it is a mitzvah to say a thing that will be heeded, so too it is a mitzvah not to say a thing that will not be heeded, and may Hashem have mercy upon us .. But I have already revealed my opinion that silence is better, and let the matter be suppressed, and even in thought he should not think anything but the meaning of the words, and in this way he shall walk securely and not stumble in anything'.
His disciple, the author of the Teshuvah MeAhavah, related2: 'And I call heaven and earth to witness upon me that I saw one who wished to make a bracha upon the mehudar esrog of our teacher, the true Gaon, may his soul rest in Eden .. and when he saw that this certain person said "Yehi Ratzon" before taking the lulav, he became angry and enraged and said with great wrath, "One who says 'Yehi Ratzon' shall not be permitted to make a bracha on his esrog," and he did not allow him to make the bracha'.
However, the Noda BiYehuda's approach was not accepted, and the great ones of Israel responded to him, to uphold and establish the holy minhag of saying "L'shem Yichud," which as above has its foundation in the holy mountains in the words of the Zohar and the Arizal.
Foremost among the respondents was the holy Rav R' Chaim of Chernovitz (author of the Be'er Mayim Chaim) in his introduction to the Sefer Sha'ar HaTefillah, where he elaborated at length to refute the words of the Noda BiYehuda, and wrote to resolve his arguments: Regarding argument a), that the reason that kodashim are by default for their own sake is 'because the kodashim already had the intention and the speech for their own sake at the time of their being set apart, in that he said "this is an olah" .. and therefore at the time of the offering, even when he offers them without specification, we say that by default this was brought up upon the altar for the sake of this .. and it is not so in the performance of the mitzvos, whose name is not upon them beforehand, as in one who recites Krias Shema, where we could say that he is reading in the Torah .. [and therefore] in all the mitzvos he must intend explicitly to fulfill this positive commandment, to fulfill the mitzvah of his Creator, and to bring forth from his mouth explicitly this intention.
And regarding argument b) he wrote: 'And these matters have already been investigated and established through intellect and reason with great clarification after clarification, sifted through thirteen sieves, that the essence of the entire Torah and mitzvos is their content and inner dimension and the spirituality within them from the hidden Names of the Holy One, blessed be He, that are concealed in them, and all the books, the holy books, are full of this .. that there is a vast distinction and distance in exalting above without limit between one who learns the Torah and fulfills its mitzvos in their plain sense alone, and one who gazes at the light of the spirituality and the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He, concealed in them'.
The Chida too, in the kuntres Simchas HaRegel3 wrote sharply, and these are his words: 'And do not heed what the Rav, our teacher Rav Yechezkel Landau, wrote in his sefer She'eilos u'Teshuvos Noda BiYehuda, where he disparaged and hurled words against saying "L'yichud KB"H u'Shechintei," and came to a state of anger against the chassidim of his land, and came to err in his words ... and he also sits and expounds that no intention is needed at all, and that all the rectifications above are accomplished by themselves through our deeds, and he disputes, with clean hands, against Rashbi and his companions, the holy ones of the Most High, and against our teacher the Ari, may his memory be for a blessing, upon whom the spirit of Hashem spoke, and Eliyahu, remembered for good, would appear to them as a man speaks to his fellow... And in any case, one should not refrain from saying before every mitzvah and before every study "L'yichud KB"H u'Shechintei" and the verse "Vihi No'am".
And in practice, so it was accepted in many of the diaspora communities of the people of Israel to say "L'shem Yichud" before performing the mitzvos4.
In the coming halacha we will discuss the Chabad minhag in saying "L'shem Yichud."
Notes:
1 שו"ת נו"ב מהדו"ק יו"ד סי' צג. וראה גם או"ח מהדו"ת סי' קז ↩
2 שו"ת ח"א סי' א ↩
3 לימוד ב', וכ"כ במורה באצבע סי' א אות א. ובמחזיק ברכה סי' רלא סק"א ↩
4 סידור יעב"ץ בהקדמתו. יסוד ושורש העבודה שער ב פ"ט. וראה שו"ת תורה לשמה סי' תע. רב פעלים או"ח ח"א סי' א. כף החיים או"ח סי' ס אות יא. ספר הלכה ברורה ח"א בסופו שו"ת אוצרות יוסף סי' ב. וכתב הרה"ק משינאווא בדברי יחזקאל החדש דף נ"ח (למרות הנכתב אודות הנהגתו של אביו בעל הדברי חיים מצאנז שסבר שלא כולם צריכים לאמרו): 'וכבר נתברר הדבר על ידי גדול אחד שגמגם על האומרים 'לשם יחוד קוב"ה ושכינתיה' קודם כל מצוה, והוא פקפק שאין זה ראוי לכל אדם לומר, וכבר מחו עליו גדולי ישראל זלה"ה הה"ג מו"ה חיים זלה"ה בספר 'שער התפלה', וברוך השם כי בטלה דעתו, וכל ישראל אומרים 'לשם יחוד' ואין פוצה פה. גם תפילה זו רשאים כל הרוצים לשוב באמת, אפילו אנשים פשוטים, לאמרה כמו כל תפילה' ↩
[C] (halacha 317)
Question: Why does the siddur of the Alter Rebbe have "L'shem Yichud" only before "Baruch She'amar," and not before the other mitzvos?
Answer: We learned1 that the Alter Rebbe wrote that one says "L'shem Yichud" before every mitzvah; however, the Rebbe noted in the indexes to the Likkutei Torah that this is among the minhogim that are not practiced in Chabad. And as in practice the Alter Rebbe in his siddur did not bring the saying of "L'shem Yichud" before performing mitzvos, except before saying "Baruch She'amar."
And so too it is written in the Sefer HaMinhagim2: 'Before donning the tallis - and likewise regarding the other mitzvos - the custom is not to say "L'shem Yichud".
In the Sha'ar HaKollel3 he elaborated to explain this, and these are his words: 'And in the siddur of the Arizal this text is found with a slight variation, to say it before several matters (such as Kiddush Levanah and Havdalah and the like), but before "Baruch She'amar" it is not mentioned at all, neither in the siddur of the Arizal nor in the other siddurim that were printed with kavanos according to Kabbalah. And seemingly one should wonder that in the siddur of the Rebbe it is the opposite, that he did not institute saying it in any place except before "Baruch She'amar." And behold, that in the other matters he did not institute saying it, presumably his reason and rationale are with him, that according to the Gemara and the Kabbalah of the Arizal he found no necessity for it — and if so, why did he institute saying it before "Baruch She'amar"?
And one may say that saying it before "Baruch She'amar" has a necessity from the Gemara and the Zohar, for behold in the Mishnah in Zevachim: "For the sake of six things the sacrifice is slaughtered: for the sake of the offering, for the sake of the one offering, for the sake of the fires, for the sake of the Name, for the sake of the aroma, for the sake of the pleasingness," and the Gemara there explains "for the sake of the pleasingness" — for the sake of the pleasing spirit; "for the sake of Hashem" — for the sake of the One who spoke and the world came into being.. However, since the tefillos were instituted in place of the sacrifices, the tefillos too must be like the sacrifices, for the sake of these six things.. And behold the general order of the tefillah is: for the sake of the sacrifice, for the sake of the one offering, for the sake of the fires, for the sake of the aroma, that is, the souls of the tzaddikim and the words of the tefillah and Michael the great prince and the ardor of the tefillah etc. And what is before the bracha that precedes Pesukei d'Zimra, we say "Baruch She'amar v'hayah ha'olam, baruch Hu etc., baruch Shemo".. this is "for the sake of Hashem" mentioned regarding the sacrifices, which is "for the sake of the One who spoke and the world came into being." And behold "for the sake of the pleasingness" was explained in the Gemara and by Rashi above as "for the sake of the pleasing spirit." And it is known that the pleasing spirit and the supernal delight is from the unification of Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei through tefillah with supernal kavanos and yichudim, as is written in the introduction to the Tikkunei Zohar mentioned above, "to bring forth the mentions of the Names of Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei with intention, to join them in the voice of Krias Shema and the speech of tefillah, which are those two Names etc., in which are included all the Havayahs and appellations and the ten sefiros etc., whether in Krias Shema, whether in tefillah, whether in songs and praises and thanksgivings (that is, in Pesukei d'Zimra)" — see there in the Kisei Melech that this is the matter of "L'shem Yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei" etc. And accordingly, in the siddurim of the Arizal in which the kavanos and the yichudim and the supernal secrets are explained, they need not precede it first with "L'shem Yichud" etc., for the kavanos and the yichudim, they themselves are the "pleasingness" mentioned regarding the sacrifices; but in this siddur in which the kavanos etc. are not found, only that the words are arranged in a manner that they contain the secrets, therefore they precede it first with "L'shem Yichud" etc. "b'yichuda shlim" in the name of all Israel, so that his tefillah be included in the tefillah of all Israel, among whom are found many who know how to have intention. And this is "for the sake of the pleasingness" mentioned regarding the sacrifices. Also in the Zohar mentioned above, only Pesukei d'Zimra and Krias Shema and tefillah are mentioned, therefore the Rebbe determined to say "L'shem Yichud Kudsha etc." at the beginning of Pesukei d'Zimra and Krias Shema and tefillah'.
But the Rebbe Rashab4 wrote: 'And we say "L'shem Yichud" before the tefillah, and thereby we discharge it for the whole day in the performance of the mitzvos etc.' And elsewhere he wrote5: 'And we say before the tefillah for the avodah of the entire day etc.'6. And the Rebbe cited this explanation many times7. And during the visit of Rav Mordechai Eliyahu8 the Rebbe said: 'That the saying of the "L'shem Yichud" at the beginning of the day is of such great force that it extends and acts upon the whole day in its entirety'. [And see also what is written in the kuntres Tefillah L'David by the Rav of Butschatsch, Birchos HaShachar, os 21].
Elsewhere the Rebbe9 added to explain: 'That essentially the Alter Rebbe holds that the matter of the kavanos (also) in the manner of the "sod" pertains to every soul, except that this is only with regard to the "nifal" (that which is effected), that to every soul is given the power to effect the matters and the drawings-down that are detailed in the kavanos of the mitzvos, even though the act of the kavanos is not a matter equal for every soul. And accordingly it appears one may say further, that the Alter Rebbe holds that a person must say "L'shem Yichud" at least once each day, in order to effect the unification of Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei in the performance of each and every mitzvah throughout the entire day. For although it is not a matter equal for every soul to intend "L'shem Yichud etc." in the performance of each and every mitzvah throughout the entire day, nevertheless it is within the power of each and every one to intend this (at least each and every one according to his own measure) at the time of tefillah, and this saying and intention at the beginning of the day is an act that extends to all the things done throughout that day, as above. And therefore he established saying it in the morning tefillah, and within that itself, at the beginning of the tefillah, before "Baruch She'amar"'.10
And the Rebbe noted11: 'And it requires investigation regarding the mitzvos that one performs before the tefillah
Therefore our minhag is to say "L'shem Yichud" only before "Baruch She'amar," and this avails for the whole day in its entirety.
It is related12 concerning the chassid R' Shilem Reich, son-in-law of the holy Rav R' Baruch Shalom, son of the Tzemach Tzedek, who was in contact with the Rebbe, the Chidushei HaRim of Gur, and once the author of the Chidushei HaRim called him to his room and asked him to explain to him the text of the bracha as it is explained in the teachings of Chabad, and R' Shilem explained, and then the author of the Chidushei HaRim said to him: 'Come and see to what extent the Alter Rebbe was precise in his approach, that there is no need to say "L'shem Yichud" before performing a mitzvah, for behold in the text of the bracha itself is hidden the entire kavanah of "yichud Kudsha Brich Hu u'Shechintei," whereas for the tefillah itself no bracha was instituted before it, and therefore he established the saying of "L'shem Yichud" before "Baruch She'amar"!
Notes:
1 בהלכה 315 ↩
2 עמ' 3 ↩
3 פ"ו ס"ב ↩
4 סה"מ תרנ"ז ע' קצח ↩
5 סה"מ עטר"ת ע' תקיח ↩
6 וראה אור התפלה ח"ד ע' כב הערה 16 ↩
7 סה"מ מלוקט ח"ב עמ' פב ועוד ↩
8 תו"מ התשנ"ב ח"א ע' 236 ↩
9 לקו"ש חל"ט ע' 46 ↩
10 בתו"מ תשמ"ג ח"א ע' 328. ובעת ביקור הרב מרדכי אליהו שם הרבי דימה את זה לברכת התורה שמברכים פעם אחת עבור כל היום ↩
11 תו"מ תש"נ ח"ב עמ' 55 ↩
12 מאמר בחצרות בית ה' – קוצק וליובאוויטש, מאת מרכז את"ה בארה"ק. וראה גם גליון בית ויזניץ אייר התשנ"ג ע' 12 שם מובא שאימרה זו אמר ר' שילם לחידושי הרי"ם ↩
[D] (halacha 318)
Laws of mentioning Hashem's Name in the study of tefillah and brochos [G]
Question: How does one say the words of the Name י"ה בו"ה at the time of saying the "L'shem Yichud"?
Answer: The Mishnah in Maseches Sanhedrin1 says: 'And these are the ones who have no share in the World to Come .. Abba Shaul says: also one who pronounces the Name by its letters'.
The Tosafos in Maseches Avodah Zarah2, after citing Rashi's explanation that "pronouncing by its letters" means an improper use of the 42-letter Name, wrote: 'And most of the world explain that he would read out the explicit letters of the special Name with the letters of the other words, and this one should not do, as it says in Pesachim, at the end of the chapter "Elu Ovrin" (daf 50) "Not as I am written am I read: I am written י"ה and read א"ד," and it appears to Ri that one should not even mention the letters י"ה as the world is accustomed, for behold י"ה is the special Name.
And the Radbaz3 wrote: 'And regarding what you asked, what is the meaning of "one who pronounces the Name by its letters," know that the explanation agreed upon among us is that he pronounces the Name without the substitution of the Name of Adnus, with each of its vowel points, but the Tosafos wrote in Maseches Sukkah and in several places that the explanation of "one who pronounces the Name" is that he reads the letters of the Name, such as "yud hei" etc., and thus the language of "one who pronounces Hashem by its letters" is precise, and therefore the teachers of children who would teach the children in its pronunciation err .. Therefore we adopt a middle position, that with the Name of Havayah all is forbidden, whether to read it as it is written or to pronounce its letters, and one who does so has no share in the World to Come, but with the Name of Adnus one need not be stringent, as we have written'.
And in the writings of the Arizal4 we find that R' Chaim Vital wrote: 'The prohibition of pronouncing the Name as it is written .. my teacher, may his memory be for a blessing, told me that the true explanation of this matter is that one should not read the four letters of Havayah as they are written, without expansion. But even if he reads it with an expansion like this: יו"ד ה"י וי"ו ה"י, this too is included in "one who pronounces the Name by its letters"'. And in the Sefer Ta'amei HaMitzvos on Parashas Shemos he wrote: 'Regarding the matter of "one who pronounces the Name by its letters," my teacher, may his memory be for a blessing, would say that even the Name with its ten letters in expansion, like this: יו"ד ה"י וי"ו ה"י, and the like, is called "pronouncing the Name by its letters." But certainly the primary explanation is that he reads the three letters of Havayah as they are written without expansion. And one must be careful in this, even in reading the expansion, and thus one should read: יו"ד א"י, ה"י א"י, וי"ו א"י, ה"י א"י'.
And the Chida5 wrote: 'And from his words we have learned that the Rav [the Rama MiPano], may his memory be for a blessing, held that to pronounce the letters of the special Name one after another is more severe than to read the Name with its vowel points of sh'va, cholam, kamatz, and he wrote that there is a great reason for this, and the Rav, may his memory be for a blessing, did not explain it to teach us the reason. Indeed, from the words of our teacher the Ari, may his memory be for a blessing, in Sha'ar HaMitzvos, Parashas Shemos, where R' Chaim Vital, may his memory be for a blessing, wrote, and these are his words, "my teacher, may his memory be for a blessing, told me that the explanation of this matter is that one should not read the letters of Havayah as they are written, without expansion, but even if he reads it in its expansion like this יו"ד ה"י וי"ו ה"י, this too is included in 'one who pronounces the Name by its letters,'" end quote — and from these words it appears that one who reads the Name as it is written is more severe than one who reads it in its expansion, as the eyes of the one who studies carefully the language of the Ari and the Rama MiPano, may their memory be for a blessing, will see'.
And so too he wrote in his sefer Pesach Einayim6: 'One who pronounces the Name by its letters etc. — our teacher the Ari, may his memory be for a blessing, agrees with the words of the Tosafos, namely to read the four letters of the special Name as they are written. However, one who reads them in expansion is also included, and one must pause, such as saying יוד אי הי, or saying יוד קא'.
And indeed we find in the She'eilos u'Teshuvos Noda BiYehuda7 that he wrote: 'But as for what his honor discussed at length, regarding those who say the text "l'yached shem יו"ד ה"י b'וי"ו ה"י," whether there is in this a matter of pronouncing the Name, and he discussed at length in the words of the Tosafos whether in the first two letters there is a prohibition of pronouncing the Name. Behold, according to what I recall from my childhood, that I heard those men would say the Name יו"ד ה"י b'וי"ו ה"י in its expansion, and in this there is certainly no matter of pronouncing the Name'.
But many poskim have already testified that the minhag is indeed to be careful in this, in accordance with the words of the Tosafos and the Arizal, and as the Chasam Sofer8 testifies: 'And in truth the world is careful and says יו"ד ק"י וי"ו ק"י'. And so too it is written in the She'eilos u'Teshuvos Divrei Chaim9.
And it is written in the Od Yosef Chai10: 'And we are careful to say יו"ד כ"י וי"ו כ"י, and it is all one. And I wrote, with the help of Heaven, elsewhere11 that it is permitted to say "the letter יו"ד and the letter ה"י and the letter וי"ו and the letter ה"י," for since he adds the word "the letter" to each and every letter, this is not included in reading the Name as it is written'.
Therefore we find that, on account of the concern of "pronouncing Hashem by its letters," we are careful not to say the letters of the Name Havayah, and we find several ways to read it: a) יוד קי בואו קי; b) יוד אי הי; c) "the letter יוד and the letter ה."
And in practice it appears that in saying "L'shem Yichud" the minhag most accepted among Anash12 is to say according to the first manner above: 'יוד קי בואו קי'.
Notes:
1 פ"י מ"א ↩
2 יח, א ד"ה הוגה השם. וראה גם תוס' סוכה ה א, ד"ה יו"ד ה"א, ותוס' שבועות לה א ד"ה באל"ף. ובמהרש"א ומהר"ם שם. וראה מש"כ בשו"ת עטרת יצחק סי' מט, ובעלי תמר על הירושלמי סנהדרין פ"י ה"א, בדברי התוס', ואכמ"ל. ולכאו' מדברי התוס' בסוכה נראה שאמירת יוד ה"י משם שלם אינו בעיה. אך מהתוס' בע"ז נראה שלגבי י"ה גם ר"י מסכים לדברי רבינו אלחנן ↩
3 חלק ה ללשונות הרמב"ם סי' לה (אלף תח) ↩
4 שער המצות פרשת שמות ↩
5 דבש לפי מערכת ע אות יב ↩
6 ע"ז דף יח, א ↩
7 מהדו"ק יו"ד סי' צג ↩
8 שו"ת ח"ה השמטות סי' קצב ↩
9 יו"ד ח"ב סי' עא ↩
10 פרשת ויחי אות כו ↩
11 בא"ח שנה ראשונה וישלח סי"א ↩
12 וכ"כ הרב רסקין בסידור אדמו"ר הזקן הערה 86 שכך נהוג עלמא. (ולהעיר שכתב לנו אחד מאנ"ש שכאשר לימדם הרב בערקע חן אמר להם לומר יוד הי בואו הי. ויתכן שהאות ב מחלקת (וראה סוף הערה 2 לגבי אמירת אותיות י"ה לבד) ועד"ז כתב בשו"ת באר הלכה ח"א סי' ג ע' יז בשי' הנוב"י ואכמ"ל) ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project - a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the group (silent): 'Shoneh Halacha - Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group