The eighty-eighth "cheder" in the palace of Hayom Yom.
Tuesday, 18 Adar I, 5703.
Shiurim: Chumash, Ki Sisa, Shlishi, with Rashi's commentary.
Tehillim, the 18th of the month, chapter 88 and chapter 89.
Tanya, we are in chapter 30. The daily portion begins with the words "V'hinei b'emes", and ends on page 76 with the word "ba'arichus".
Today's teaching is a short one, and it is really a clarification of a halachah written in the Alter Rebbe's "Seder Birchos Hanehenin". The teaching draws our attention to understanding the precise wording of this halachah. Let us first read the halachah, which appears in the first chapter of "Seder Birchos Hanehenin", halachah 13.
In that halachah the Alter Rebbe speaks about a person who ate all the types of food over which one recites the berachah mei'ein shalosh - that is, he ate from the seven species, fruits, also mezonos foods, and he also drank wine. He does not need to recite a separate berachah mei'ein shalosh over each one; rather he includes them all in one berachah, in order of importance: he begins with "al hamichyah", then "al hagefen", and then "al pri ha'etz".
The Alter Rebbe spells out the wording that one says. In the first passage one says "al hamichyah v'al hakalkalah v'al hagefen v'al pri hagefen v'al ha'etz v'al pri ha'etz v'al tenuvas hasadeh v'al eretz chemdah", and when he reaches the conclusion of the berachah, before the chasimah, he says "v'nodeh lecha al ha'aretz v'al hamichyah v'al pri hagefen v'al haperos".
And here one must pay attention: in the chasimah of the berachah one says "Baruch atah Hashem, al ha'aretz v'al hamichyah v'al pri hagefen v'haperos". That is, when the fruits are mentioned one does not say "v'al" again, as we said in the two preceding phrases - "v'al hamichyah" and "al pri hagefen" - but rather, when we come to the fruits we say "al pri hagefen v'haperos", without the word "v'al".
In the example in the halachah, as mentioned, the case is of a person who ate all three things: mezonos, fruits of the seven species, and also wine. But the teaching that the Rebbe brings here in Hayom Yom refers to a person who drank wine and ate only fruits of the seven species. The halachah is exactly the same - he recites one berachah over both, and in the chasimah of the berachah, here too, one does not add the word "v'al".
Let us now read the daily teaching, and afterwards we will explain the reason for it. The Rebbe says in the teaching: "In the berachah mei'ein shalosh, if one drank wine and ate fruits of the seven species, he concludes: 'v'al pri hagefen v'al haperos, Baruch atah Hashem al pri hagefen v'haperos' (and not 'v'al' haperos)" - in the passage that comes just before the chasimah, at the close, one says "v'al pri hagefen v'al haperos", meaning that we say "v'al" for pri hagefen, which is the wine, and again "v'al" for the fruits of the seven species that he ate. But in the chasimah of the berachah one says "Baruch atah Hashem, al pri hagefen v'haperos", and not "v'al haperos" - one does not add the word "v'al" when mentioning the fruits, but rather includes them: "al pri hagefen v'haperos".
This halachah applies only when one is reciting the berachah over wine and over fruits of the seven species together. In contrast, if, for example, a person ate mezonos foods and fruits of the seven species, then at the final conclusion of the berachah he does say "al ha'aretz v'al hamichyah v'al haperos" - there he does say "v'al". The whole emphasis that one does not say "v'al" applies only when it comes to pri hagefen and the fruits.
And what is the reason for this? Because there is an opinion that a person who drinks wine concludes with "al haperos" - according to that opinion one does not say "al pri hagefen" for wine, but rather in the chasimah of the berachah over wine one says "v'al haperos". Although the Alter Rebbe does not rule like that opinion, according to that opinion it would come out that if we conclude the final berachah saying "v'al pri hagefen v'al haperos", the words "v'al haperos" would also fit the wine; it would turn out that we conclude over the wine with two conclusions - "v'al pri hagefen" and "v'al haperos" - with both expressions fitting the wine.
Therefore the Alter Rebbe, who takes that view into account, changed the wording of the chasimah of the berachah, and writes in the halachah that one should say "v'haperos". And how is the chasimah of the berachah then understood? As though one is saying "v'al pri hagefen v'haperos" - "hagefen" meaning the wine, and "v'haperos" being the other fruits. In contrast, had he said "v'al haperos", it would appear as though he were saying "pri hagefen" a second time, according to that opinion. This is the reason one must say "v'haperos" without "v'al", and this is the point the Rebbe highlights in the daily teaching, clarifying that we should note the omission of the word "v'al".
To conclude the shiur, as we have seen on previous days, over many shiurim we see the connection of the daily lesson to the order of the Rambam's Mishneh Torah. In the previous teachings we saw the hint to Sefer Haflaah - the sefer we are currently in - and we also learned the connection in an earlier teaching to the first halachos of Sefer Haflaah, Hilchos Shevuos.
In today's teaching we find a hint to the next two sets of halachos in Sefer Haflaah: Hilchos Nedarim and Hilchos Nezirus. And what is the connection? In Hilchos Nedarim, in the fifth chapter, there is an entire discussion of wine - when a person vowed not to drink wine, when this includes foods cooked in wine and when it does not; there is a whole discussion there of the subject of wine, and likewise today's teaching speaks of "if one drank wine".
And there is also a connection here to Hilchos Nezirus, in which the Rambam speaks of the things forbidden to a nazir - the vine, the fruits of the vine, and everything that comes from the vine. These are the subjects discussed in the daily shiur; "al pri hagefen v'al haperos" alludes both to what is discussed in Hilchos Nedarim and to what is discussed afterwards in Hilchos Nezirus.