A relatively short halachic observation this time, in my mind for personal reasons.
Introduction
Chazal instituted a variety of brachos to be made to thank Hashem for possessions, geographical features of the Universe, life events and more. Some of these brachos are made only in very specific and clearly defined circumstances, such as the bracha made upon sighting the New Moon each month (colloquially known as kidush levana). Others, such as the bracha of shehechiyanu, are made on many occasions, and some thought is required to identify the common denominator between these occasions.
A bracha that is similar to shehechiyanu, but made less frequently, is the bracha of hatov vehameitiv.[1] This bracha is made upon hearing good news or acquisition of new items, where the person hearing is not the sole beneficiary. Examples explicit in the Mishna and gemara are when rain falls and the person owns farmland in partnership with another, joint purchase of a new house or utensils, inheritance, and drinking a new type of wine together with others.[2]
The final explicit example is when a baby boy is born to a couple.[2] The clear implication is that no bracha should be made upon hearing of the birth of a girl. This halacha would have been easily understandable in the ancient world, as the birth of a girl was simply not considered good news.[3] Good news is defined subjectively rather than objectively,[4] such that this halacha is only an indicator of the then prevalent attitude to the birth of a girl, and not necessarily of an objectively 'correct' attitude.
Subjectivity and Modern Application
By the early 20th century, perceptions appear to have changed significantly. The Mishna Berura writes that although the bracha of Hatov Vehameitiv is not said on the birth of a daughter, it is obvious that shehecheyanu should be said the first time one sees his daughter. He argues that this is no worse than seeing a friend for the first time in 30 days, where Chazal tell us that the bracha of shehecheyanu is said.[5]
Although this may have been obvious to the Mishna Berura, I find it extremely difficult to accept that recitation of Shehecheyanu after the birth of a daughter was so obvious to Chazal and poskim preceding the Mishna Berura to the extent that they did not even see the need to write it. Furthermore, the analogy to seeing a friend after 30 days is questionable – the experience of being reunited with an old friend is very different to that of the birth of a child, who the parents have never met before.
It is therefore clear to me that the Mishna Berura simply was not comfortable with the idea that the birth of a daughter could be passed off as a non-event (a similar feeling felt I am sure was felt by many of us the first time we encountered this halacha). By his time, the worth of women simply had to be celebrated, even if full equality was still a long way off.
This position has been accepted at least in part by almost the entire Jewish world. While some poskim disagree with the Mishna Berura and write that no bracha should be said on the birth of a daughter,[6] festive celebrations of the birth of a daughter are the norm in all sections of our society. There is no doubt in my mind that this represents a change from ancient times.[7]
It is also clear that this change has continued past the time of the Mishna Berura, and in today's society, many (if not all) Orthodox Jews experience equal degrees of joy from the birth of male and female children.[8] The logical conclusion is that the ruling of the Mishna Berura, perhaps radical in his time, is now anachronistic. The correct bracha to say after the birth of any child is Hatov Vehameitiv, as long as the parents consider this 'good news.'[9]
[1] The
full bracha is ברוך אתה ה' א-להנו מלך העולם הטוב והמטיב, not to be confused with the much longer
version said as the fourth bracha after a meal (although clearly both brachos
thank Hashem for the good He has given us).
[2] Brachos
59b. When the person hearing is the sole beneficiary, the bracha of
shehechiyanu is made.
[3] See
also Kiddushin 82b. While this was the prevalent view even then it was not
unanimous – see Bava Basra 141a.
[4] Although
the Rashba writes that the bracha is only made on tangible benefit and not on
any good news. A son typically provided tangible benefits to his parents in
their old age and by taking care of their burial (daughters were historically
less able to do so), and 'every person desires to have an inheritor' (Responsa
4:77).
[5] Mishna
Berura 223:2
[6] See for
example Mishne Halachos 13:32
[7] In
the above responsum, the Mishne Halachos points out that Ri ben Yakar felt it
necessary to tell people not to make the bracha of Hadayan Haemes (said upon
the receipt of bad news) on the birth of a daughter.
[8] In my
view, this change is a positive one and an example of the progress made by
humanity. However, the halachic ramifications would be true even were the
change to be neutral or even negative.
[9] Even if the
happiness experienced is not 100% equal after the birth of a boy and a girl.
Your last conclusion does not logically follow. If both genders are desired, then no blessing is said since you didn't learn any good news. In the days of the mishna you didn't know the gender in advance and you had a preference, so at birth you learned some news that could be good. Nowadays you (generally) know in advance and (generally) don't care.
ReplyDeleteI believe you are mistaken, for two reasons. Firstly, even when the gender is already known, the birth of a healthy child is good news. Although today damage to the baby occurring during birth is rarer than in the past, it is certainly not unheard of. On a simpler level, we still relate to a healthy birth as good news, and not as an inevitability.
DeleteSecondly, the learning of something new is not a requirement for the bracha of HaTov VeHameitiv. The bracha is also made upon purchasing new items or drinking new wine, even when there is no element of surprise involved.
1) A bar mitzvah (or any birthday) is also commonly seen as a happy time but it's not news in the sense of 'new' something unpredictable/unknown. The existence is already known; may you never have to experience it, but if you talk to couples undergoing fertility treatments a positive pregnancy test (something that chazal didn't have) is often a significantly more emotional event than the birth itself. The health aspect is not at all relevant here, but in a discussion of the laws of "hagomel" (does the mom say, can a parent say for a child, etc.)
Delete2) Changing from good news to the type of HaTov VeHameitiv said on acquiring new things is not likely to help your case, since you've owned this fetus/baby for about 9 months already and because there is no rule that if you buy a small house when a bigger house exists that you don't say a blessing (leaving the absence, classically, of a blessing on a female unexplained).
Recall the Talmud a few pages earlier decries a prayer said for a fetus to become male. The knowledge of the gender was the big unknown. Praying for health never stops and neither does enjoying passing lifecycle markers, but the 'news' is the gender. ילדה אשתו זכר shouldn't be read as "your wife gave birth (and by the way it's male)" but rather "that baby you were expecting was male". It's hard for us to relate to how nerve-racking it was to wait 9 months to know if this pregnancy was going to be a great success or an unfortunate big expense (in their eyes).
I appreciate your comments, but I still disagree. Point by point:
Delete1a) A bar mitzvah is not relevant here, as nothing new is attained.
1b) "but if you talk to couples undergoing fertility treatments a positive pregnancy test (something that chazal didn't have) is often a significantly more emotional event than the birth itself" - could be for some, and it is conceivable (pardon the pun) that a bracha should also be said on the positive pregnancy test. But I would argue that the level of the emotion is not the decisive factor, rather the tangible benefit.
1c) "The health aspect is not at all relevant here, but in a discussion of the laws of "hagomel"." I beg to differ. Hagomel is relevant to the health of the mother, and is made on being saved from danger (my view is that this bracha should not be made after birth nowadays, but this is another discussion). On the baby there can be no hagomel, as before birth there was no baby (only a foetus. See https://torahclarity.blogspot.com/2020/10/foetal-life.html). HaTov VeHameitiv is made on the new, healthy baby.
2a) "since you've owned this fetus/baby for about 9 months already" - again, a baby is something very different to a foetus.
2b) "there is no rule that if you buy a small house when a bigger house exists that you don't say a blessing (leaving the absence, classically, of a blessing on a female unexplained)" No - classically a female was not considered something positive at all, unlike a small house.
2c) "It's hard for us to relate to how nerve-racking it was to wait 9 months to know if this pregnancy was going to be a great success or an unfortunate big expense (in their eyes)" - but it's easier to relate to the fear of the pregnancy ending in miscarriage or death at birth, which still exists today to a lesser extent.
It feels like you are wavering between many different reasons. Can you pinpoint what happy thing you think is the impetus for the blessing here? Some of the options I'm seeing here: 1) that the baby is alive and not dead. 2) that the baby is healthy and without congenital defects. 3) that the baby survived the dangerous delivery process. 4) the parents' estate now owns a baby instead of a fetus. 5) the gender turned out to be the way you wanted. 6) a special enactment on parents having a child. 7) something else?
DeleteI agree of course that a fetus has a different status to a born baby, and you'd agree that a bar mitzvah also has a different status from a baby, but changing status is not on its own a reason for a blessing. (Indeed I doubt you'd say a blessing on turning 5 just because your erchin value went up.) You have to explain what about the new status is a tangible ('new clothes') or unpredictable ('good news') benefit. Then we have to go back and answer why the blessing was only mentioned for males at birth.
Option 1 doesn't seem like the correct reason since we don't generally say this blessing on hearing a living relative didn't die (which should be a bigger deal than a potential relative not instantiating).
Option 2 doesn't seem like the correct reason for the same sort of idea.
Option 3 doesn't seem like the correct reason because for that the baby should say hagomel (if anything).
Option 4 doesn't seem like the correct reason because is the newborn that much more valuable to your estate than the fetus? Both are incapable of working on a farm currently and for the near future. Perhaps you will point to some specific halachic monetary benefit which comes at birth proper (eg. ability to inherit).
Option 5 is perfectly plausible.
Option 6 doesn't appear to be the position of the rif, rambam and all the others who left out the example of the gemara. Indeed the widespread practice in the middle ages was not to say a blessing on boys or girls.
Now why was/is it only for males:
For option 1-4 you'd seemingly want to explain that despite the life/health being objectively good, the simultaneous news about the gender ruins your mood, but that is implausible because you say a blessing on inheriting even if your mood is ruined because your dad died. To say the fact that a given baby girl is alive instead of dead is a bad thing is quite extreme and seems contradicted by, among other things, the laws of mourning let alone murder.
For option 4 if you found a halachically objective monetary benefit (like inheritance) then it's not clear how changing societal mores will matter here, since halachic monetary law fundamentally doesn't.
For option 5 it all just depends if there is something specific you want.
For option 6 the gender distinction was baked in to the original enactment and cannot be changed.
If you think to argue that the blessing is on the existence of the pregnancy but we delay it until birth in case the pregnancy terminates, recall 222:4 if it's possible a problem will develop later we still say the blessing now and not worry about possible future problems. Recall as well 221:2 even just rain without fruit is enough to bless, all the more so a fetus who will grow.
At the very least you should admit my thesis is consistent with all the data and not implausible, in which case we have to consider why are we resuscitating, let alone expanding, a blessing which wasn't practiced when we have no mesora how to apply it? Is my thesis not plausible enough to generate any safek brachos?
I am not wavering - there are indeed many good things about having a baby. In ancient times it would have been all of 1-5, now it is 1-4 (although 1 and 3 are essentially the same thing). 'Owning' a foetus has only one ramification - if someone forces the mother to have a miscarriage, he must compensate the father. A baby is an entirely new entity, and the bracha is made on this.
DeleteIt is implausible to say that the birth of a baby is not good news, because everyone relates to it as good news. I don't have any great explanation for the Rambam's omission (Yad Pshuta suggests that it is because 'good news' is subjective and for some, the birth of a female also counts), but I doubt it is because he argues with the gemara.
You're not only unwavering in your conclusion but in your refusal to analyze the situation carefully and precisely.
DeleteThere is indeed a (minority) school of thought that shehechiyanu is said whenever you want essentially, and I'm not here to debate that. But you don't give the impression anywhere that this whole post is relying on it.
May whoever's birth inspired this post grow "to Torah Chupa and Maasim Tovim"
I would happily continue this discussion if you (or anyone else) are prepared to show me what is imprecise about my analysis, but so far I have been unconvinced by your arguments.
DeleteThe post indeed does not rely on being able to say shehechiyanu 'whenever you want.' I do however make it clear that 'good news' is defined subjectively, and I understood that you agreed.
Thank you for your kind wishes.