Q & A: The Blessing Of HaGomel (Part VII)

Question: I recently returned from a trip abroad and wanted to say HaGomel. When I mentioned this to the officers of my synagogue, however, they told me that I would have to wait until Shabbos to do so. I was not given any reason for this and did not wish to display my ignorance, so I quietly acquiesced. Can you please explain why I had to wait?

Name Withheld Via E-mail

Synopsis: The Mechaber rules that a person is required to offer hoda’ah if he survived crossing a sea, survived traveling through the wilderness, recovered from a serious illness, or was set free after being imprisoned. He specifies that the blessing of the hoda’ah must be recited before a minyan.

We mentioned that there is a specific sentence that those assembled should recite in response to HaGomel. The usual response to a blessing, “Amen,” is not sufficient in this case because there is a requirement for all present to recite their own blessing of thanks and not rely on a messenger’s thanks.

We discussed the various opinions about whether reciting the blessing with a minyan is required l’chatchila or not and whether the person reciting the blessing is counted in the minyan for this purpose. As we noted, the Mishna Berurah rules most leniently – that the quorum should include the one reciting the blessing. Many other authorities agree with this opinion.

As we saw last week, Rabbi Moshe Sternbuch (Orach Chayyim, vol 2:143) differentiates between the minimum ten required for tefillah or any other davar she’b’kedusha. A minyan for prayer is valid no matter how many of the ten are actually engaged in the prayer; as long as they are present, they complete the minyan. However, for HaGomel, the failure of those present to respond defeats the entire purpose of one’s reciting the blessing in public in the first place. He therefore advises that one recite the blessing loudly so that all hear and respond.

* * * * *

He further explains that “with the bridegroom, it is simply a matter of the need for a tzibbur – a minyan required to recite such a blessing. Therefore, the bridegroom may be counted to add to the minimum quorum of ten. However, here [HaGomel], from the verse ‘viy’romemu’hu b’k’hal am…’’ its simple meaning is that he has to recite the blessing before ten as praise [i.e., as thanks] to G-d and [therefore it] must be before ten. If the verse would have stated [in an inverted manner] ‘b’k’hal am y’romemu’hu’ – In the assembly of people, exalt Him – then I would understand it to mean that He be exalted in the midst of the entire assembly [with him included]. Since the verse does not appear in that order, the requirement is to bless before ten, not including the one reciting the blessing.”

Now in fact, there is a twofold difficulty with the above reasoning. First, from the Gemara (supra Ketubot 7a-b), we find that R. Nachman, in the name of Huna b. R. Natan, derives Birkat Chatanim from the verse (Ruth 4:2) “Vayikach asara anashim mi’ziknei ha’ir, vayomer shevu poh, vayeshvu” – And he [Boaz] gathered ten men from amongst the elders of the city and told them sit here, and they sat. From this verse, it is clear that Boaz gathered ten men aside from himself, which seems a clear proof that he, as the bridegroom, could not be included in the minyan of the ten. If so, according to R. Nachman, bridegrooms should not be included in the minyan, yet the halacha (Mechaber, Even Ha’ezer 62:4) is that the bridegroom is included in the count of ten. Second, according to R. Abahu, how is it possible that we derive from the same verse two exactly opposite outcomes? That for HaGomel, we require ten men aside from the one who blesses, while for the blessing of the bridegroom, he may be included in the quorum of ten?

To be continued.