Visitors to Congregation Shaarei Orah, the Sephardic Congregation of Teaneck, are amazed at the wide variety of Sephardic siddurim available for our congregants. Even more interesting are the nuanced differences between the various siddurim. One example stands out.
In the Moroccan, Syrian and Turkish siddurim, the ending for the 12th blessing in the Amidah is printed as “Shover oyevim u’machnia minim.” However, in the siddurim that follow the rulings of Hacham Ovadia, the conclusion is “Shover oyevim u’machnia zeidim.” The Yemenite siddur also concludes in this manner.
The former group opts to conclude with the word “minim” because Maran Ha’Chida, in his Sefer Kesher Gudal, writes that one should end this blessing by saying “u’machnia minim.” The reason for this is because one must conclude every blessing similar to the text it started with (this is referred to by Chazal as “chatima mei’ein p’tichah”). Thus, the blessing of “Ata Kadosh” ends with the words “Hakel HaKadosh” and the blessing of “Refaenu” ends with the words “Rofeh cholei amo Yisrael,” etc. Therefore, the blessing of “LaMinim V’lamalshinim” should end with the words “shover oyevim u’machnia minim.”
Rabbeinu Yosef Chaim, the famous author of the Ben Ish Chai, in his Sefer Ben Yehoyada (Brachot 28a), adds as sort of a proof to this matter that the author of this blessing was Shmuel HaKatan and it could be that Shmuel HaKatan hinted his name at the end of the blessing, like many poets do, in acronym form, as follows: “SH’over O’yevim U’machnia M’inim; this is an acronym for the Shin, Mem, Vav, and Alef of Shmuel’s name. The last letter of his name, Lamed, is hinted in the first word of the blessing, “LaMinim.
However, Maran Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef, zt”l, disputes this position, arguing in part that it is farfetched to think that Shmuel HaKatan would have hinted his name in a text that is meant as a curse upon heretics. We can add that the Gemara in Sanhedrin explains that Shmuel HaKatan was given this nickname “Shemaktin et atzmo,” due to his great humility. It is difficult to assume that such a humble man would encrypt his name into the bracha he composed.
However, the argument of Maran HaChida still stands in that one must always end the bracha in a text similar to its beginning; thus, the text of “u’machnia minim” seems more of an appropriate ending to the blessing, which begins “LaMinim VeLamalshinim.”
Nevertheless, Maran Rabbeinu Ovadia Yosef, zt”l, argues that the correct version is indeed “shover oyevim u’machnia zeidim.” He notes that Hagaon Harav Chaim Palagi rules likewise in his Sefer Ruach Chaim and that this has been the custom of the mekubalim in the famous Kabbalistic yeshiva “Bet El,” located in the Old City of Jerusalem.
Hacham Ovadia cites the text of “u’machnia zeidim” is the text quoted in the works of all of the early Geonim such as the siddurim of Rav Sa’adia Gaon and Rav Amram Gaon, as well as the siddur of the Rambam (that appears at the end of Sefer Ahavah in the Mishneh Torah). Moreover, we find in the Talmud Yerushalmi (in the fourth perek of Brachot) that the proper ending is “zeidim.” Regarding the Chida’s question that “u’machnia zeidim” does not fit the beginning of the blessing, we can answer that the concluding term “zeidim” emphasizes that only the “zeidim” (deliberate sinners) are included in this curse. Thus, only the leading heretics are cursed but not their followers who are misled (similar to the Rambam limiting severe punishment to those who initiated heretical movements, such as the Tzedukim and Karaim, in Hilchot Mamrim Perek 3).
Beloved Shaarei Orah member Itamar Carmi observes that it is not surprising to find such variation in this bracha, since this bracha was not part of the original Amidah composed by the Anshei Knesset HaGedolah. Beloved Shaarei Orah member Richard Schulz adds that the text may have been impacted by censorship of those who felt offended by this bracha.
While the “official” custom of Shaarei Orah is to conclude with the word zeidim, nonetheless a variety of practices persist. Regarding this fascinating dispute one must stand back and conclude “eilu v’eilu divrei Elokim chayim” both options are supported by great rabbanim and have a rich basis to support them.
By Rabbi Haim Jachter
Rabbi Haim Jachter is the spiritual leader of Congregation Shaarei Orah, the Sephardic Congregation of Teaneck.
