What is the exact meaning of amen and where does the word come from?
David H.
(Via E-Mail)
Last week, we noted that the Aruch Hashulchan writes that one should always respond amen to a blessing one hears and failure to do so “is a great sin.” Amen, he explains, should be said with the following three kavanot: l’vai – would that it be so; emunah – an expression of belief; and emet – truth.
The Tur notes that his father, the Rosh, would respond baruch hu u’varuch shmo to every blessing he heard. However, the Aruch Hashulchan writes that one should only do so if one doesn’t intend to fulfill one’s obligation to say that blessing by listening to it. Otherwise, saying baruch hu u’varuch shmo is a hefsek. He also writes that some authorities were uncomfortable with people saying baruch hu u’varuch shmo since they sometimes say it at the wrong time.
We noted that it is almost universal to respond baruch hu u’varuch shmo at the mention of Hashem’s name when the kohanim go up to duchan. We pointed out that doing so is not a hefsek since saying Birkat Kohanim is the kohanim’s obligation, not ours.
* * * * *
A year and a half ago, our long-term halacha columnist and my good friend, HaRav Yaakov Simcha Cohen, zt”l, passed away. He was very close with my late uncle, HaRav Sholom Klass, zt”l, publisher of The Jewish Press (whose 16th yahrtzeit was observed on 10 Shevat – January 20th). He wrote extensively on Hilchot Orach Chayim in The Jewish Press and also authored numerous books. In his last volume, Prayer the Right Way (Urim), there are two articles relevant to our discussion. I am taking the liberty of including them in this discussion.
In “Let Us Say Amen” (p. 256), Rabbi Cohen asks: “The phrase ‘Venomar Amen’ – and let us say Amen, and the statement ‘V’imru Amen’ – and say Amen in the Birkat Hamazon generally are recited without any communal response. Is this proper?”
He responds: “In one of the letters of the Lubavitcher Rebbe Zt’l – (Shaarei Halacha U’Minhag, vol. 1 Orach Chayyim p.211) he notes that his saintly father-in-law [Rav Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn] Zt’l did not respond ‘Amen’ when the person leading the Birkat Hamazon concluded the fourth beracha by saying ‘al yechasreinu.’
“At issue is that the above phrase contains the concluding words of the fourth blessing of Birkat Hamazon. Accordingly, it is halachically proper to say ‘Amen’ whenever one hears the conclusion of a beracha. To this the Rebbe notes that perhaps one relies on the ‘Amen’ that is chanted upon the conclusion of the subsequent phrase, ‘Venomar Amen’ [directly before the paragraph of ‘Bamarom’] or the phrase ‘V’imru Amen’ [right before the paragraph of ‘Yir’u’].
“The Rebbe, Zt’l, remarks that while common practice is not for people to respond ‘Amen’ when these phrases are said, he simply cannot understand why no one responds ‘Amen’ when the leader says the phrase ‘Venomar Amen’ [or ‘V’imru Amen’]. Indeed both are requests for all present to respond ‘Amen.’”
Rabbi Cohen concludes: “The Rebbe is right. A call for a response, such as ‘Venomar Amen’ or ‘V’imru Amen’ should mandate a communal retort. Such a dual role played by both the leader and those present symbolizes a format of communal activity, wherein the tzibbur responds to the leader; for example, as in ‘Bar’chu’ and ‘Kedushah.’ Yet common custom is simply to disregard such requests to respond in the Birkat Hamazon. Perhaps congregations should be made aware of their responsibilities.”
While I understand Rabbi Cohen’s point regarding “Venomar Amen” and “V’imru Amen,” the common custom is otherwise. The Gemara (Berachot 45a) states, “Go see what the people do” – and this is the halacha. Thus, there is no mandated response to these phrases even though textually it would seem that one is called for.
I find the Rebbe’s reasoning difficult regarding “Venomar Amen” and/or “V’imru Amen” serving as a response for the last blessing of Birkat Hamazon – Hatov v’Hameitiv, thus in his view eliminating any need for a response at the conclusion of that blessing. Indeed, the Tur (Orach Chayim 189) cites his brother HaRav Yechiel, who questions the interruption of extra Harachaman requests between this last blessing and the blessing over the wine (when grace is recited over wine). The Tur himself argues that these requests do not constitute a hefsek.
The Bach (op cit) notes that on Pesach night we also “interrupt” by saying many piyutim between Hallel and the fourth cup of wine (although the Maharal disapproved of this practice and only recited these piyutim after the fourth cup).
The Aruch Hashulchan (O.C.189:7) cites this passage of the Tur. From his words it seems that while saying these Harachaman requests is not considered a hefsek, they are not an integral part of Birkat Hamazon. As such, we are left with the quandary: How is responding amen to them considered a response to Hatov v’Hameitiv?
An answer may be found in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav (O.C.189:7). He writes, “There are those who argue that since it has become the custom to recite Harachaman requests it is as if they are part of the blessing; therefore they are not considered an interruption.” It’s true that the Rav (Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi) wrote his Shulchan Aruch for the benefit of all segments of Klal Yisrael and sometimes ruled differently for his own chassidim in Piskei Hasiddur (found in the back of the Shulchan Aruch HaRav). But in this case, he says nothing different in his Piskei Hasiddur, so it is obvious that the Rebbe based his view on the Shulchan Aruch HaRav.
(To be continued)
