In relation to why we say "Baruch shem kevod..." after tefillin shel rosh, in your insights to Menachot 36a, you state "The Acharonim (see MISHNAH BERURAH there, 25:21) explain that one should say "Baruch Shem Kevod" because of the concern for the opinion of Rashi. "Baruch Shem Kevod" is said by one who mistakenly recited a blessing that was not necessary (see Shulchan Aruch OC 106). In deference to Rashi's opinion, we say "Baruch Shem Kevod" after the blessing for the Shel Rosh".
I understand that "in deference" means "for respect". I also understand that you imply that the Mishnah Berura (25.21) says that we say Baruch Shem just to show respect for Rashi, but not because we have any safek: we pasken like R Tam and therefore we should say two berachot without Baruch shem (as the Aruch Hashulchan says). Just for respect to Rashi we symbolically say Baruch Shem. I like the explanation (of why we say Baruch shem even though we pasken like R Tam) very much. However, I don't see this explanation in the textual words of the Mishnah Berura. The MB says "MISHUM CHASHASH SAFEK BERACHA LEBATALA... VELO SHEHU SAFEK GAMUR... RAK LIRVACHA DEMILTA LEHOTZI ATZMEINU MIDEI KOL PIKPUK...".
1) Can you clarify to me?
2) Is there other instance where we say Baruch Shem or we say other things or do other action to show respect for the rejected opinion? (which, again, seems to me a beautiful idea).
3) Just a minor question: why the MB says "MISHUM CHASHASH SAFEK BERACHA LEBATALA"? Should he say "MISHUM SAFEK BERACHA LEBATALA" or "MISHUM CHASHASH BERACHA LEBATALA"?
Thanks!!
dino
Dino Feigelstock, Washington DC
Shalom Dino,
A) Your note that we say Baruch Shem after the Berachah on the Tefilin Shel Rosh out of "respect for Rashi" is not quite precise. Both the Insight you quoted and the words of the Mishnah Berurah themselves indicate that the motive is a very remote concern for Berachah l'Vatalah created by Rashi's view. In other words, we follow Rabeinu Tam and recite two Berachos, yet we add Baruch Shem l'Ravchah d'Milsa to eliminate even that small doubt.
B) This brings us to your second question, why we do not find a similar custom elsewhere. This is an excellent question and discussed in several works. One oft-cited contrast is Hallel on days when only half-Hallel is recited. Although there is a dispute among the Rishonim whether a Berachah is said, we do recite the Berachah yet do not add Baruch Shem. The difference seems to be unique features that apply to Tefilin. The Aruch ha'Shulchan (OC 25) offers additional reasons, linked to the special unification of Hash-m's Name inherent in wearing Tefilin. The Mekor Chayim (OC 25) writes that since the Ribono Shel Olam is said to "wear" Tefilin, we add Baruch Shem as a gesture of honor.
C) Many note that the source for the Rema's ruling is Rabeinu Yosef Ibn Chabib. We know his position only through a citation in the Beis Yosef. He himself followed Rabeinu Tam and said two Berachos until he was told there are passages in the Zohar implying that only one blessing should be recited. The rule is that where the Zohar issues a clear directive and there is no explicit Gemara to the contrary, we give weight to the words of Kabalah. Lacking full access to those passages, Rabeinu Yosef Ibn Chabib settled on saying Baruch Shem as a precaution, acknowledging the possibility that the Zohar supports Rashi. This explains why Tefilin received a special "overlay" of caution not found in other disputed Berachos.
D) Concerning the phrase "Chashash Safek Berachah l'Vatalah" in the Mishnah Berurah: whether he wrote "Chashash," "Safek," or both, the intent is the same. There are two opinions which can turn the issue into a Safek, but we rule like Rabeinu Tam, so the second Berachah is not an actual Safek anymore. Nevertheless, a slim possibility remains that we have ruled incorrectly, and Baruch Shem removes even that distant concern, in the spirit of Rabeinu Yosef Ibn Chabib's ruling.
Kol Tuv,
Aharon Steiner