Issue Number 14 --- 19 Shevat, 5755
Compiled and Published by Kollel Menachem - Lubavitch (Melbourne, Australia)
in the zechus of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, o.b.m.
In the following, several aspects of the blessing hagomel, said after travel, are discussed:
The Talmud [1] states that emergence safely from four situations of danger require one to offer thanks to Hashem: completion of journeys over the sea, of journeys through the wilderness, one who recovered from illness and one who was freed from prison.
This is based on the verse in Tehilim (107, 47): "Let them give thanks to the L-rd for His kindness and [proclaim] His wonders to the children of man".
The Shulchan Aruch [2] states that these thanks take the form of the blessing "Blessed are You, L-rd our G-d, King of the universe, who bestows beneficences upon the culpable, for He has bestowed goodness upon me".
The Rosh [3] explains that the blessing is in place of a Korban Todah (thanksgiving sacrifice) which would have been offered in the Temple.
The commentary Yad Hamelech [4] on the Rambam suggests that hagomel is required only after journeys to sea or in the wilderness where something dangerous actually occurred and from which the person emerged safely. If the person came to no danger at all, no blessing would be required.
The Mishna Brura [5] and others, however, dispute this and rule that hagomel is required after all journeys across the sea or the wilderness.
The Shulchan Aruch [6] states that the Ashkenazi custom is to say hagomel after journeying through the wilderness where travellers are at risk from wild animals and robbers, but not from city to city where one travels in relative safety. (The Mogen Avrohom [7] comments on the latter case that if in fact they encountered danger, hagomel would also be required).
The Sefardi custom is to say hagomel after all journeys, even from city to city, since all journeys (outside cities) are considered dangerous.
The K'tzos Hashulchan [8] writes, within the Ashkenaz custom, that even where one traverses a wilderness without the risk of danger, such as by train, it is not necessary to say hagomel.
There is general consensus amongst halachic authorities, and the Shulchan Aruch [9] rules accordingly, that a person walking through dangerous places, must cover at least a parsa (about 3.8 km) to be obligated in hagomel. (If the area through which one travelled was extremely dangerous, one is required to recite hagomel even after a shorter journey.)
Arguments arise, however, when one travels by car or train where this distance can be covered quickly. Does one go by the time it takes to walk a parsa (72 minutes), or by the actual distance of a parsa?
The Yabia Omer [10] rules that the obligation to recite hagomel is only after travelling in a vehicle for at least the time it takes to walk a parsa (around 72 minutes).
The Pesach Had'vir [11] and the S'dei Chemed [12], (and it would appear, also the Mishnah Brurah [13]), however, are of the opinion that the term parsa refers to the actual distance of a parsa.
The Machaber [14] cites two opinions as to whether hagomel applies to any situation where one was miraculously saved from danger (such as if one was gored by an ox or attacked by a lion or a wall fell on him), or only to the four situations mentioned above. He rules that in cases other than these four situations it is best to say the brocho without Hashem's name.
The Taz [15] and Mogen Avrohom [16] however, rule that it should be said with Hashem's name after being saved from any dangerous situation.
The Lubavitcher Rebbe [17], in response to the question of whether hagomel should be recited after an aeroplane journey, stated that it depends on the two opinions brought by the Shulchan Aruch. Since our custom is in accordance with the opinion that it is recited after any dangerous journey - and not just the four cases of the Talmud - it should be recited after any aeroplane journey. (In a later letter he cautions that there are those who disagree, and suggests referring to the Tzitz Eliezer - see below. The Rebbe is said to have instructed a chosid from California, not to say hagomel on aeroplane trips over land since plane travel is nowadays much safer.)
Reb Moshe Feinstein [18] similarly rules that hagomel should be recited after aeroplane travel. He reasons that even according to the opinion brought in Shulchan Aruch that hagomel is only to be recited in the four cases of the Talmud, it still should be said after an aeroplane journey. This is because an aeroplane flight is similar to a ship journey (one of the four cases in the Talmud) in that in neither does man travel in his natural habitat, and from this unnatural habitat he is "saved" by a "foreign" means, which itself is susceptible to danger. He concludes that hagomel is required after any flight, whether overseas or not, and even if no danger actually occurred.
The Be'er Moshe [19] quotes the previous Satmar Rebbe (who also requires hagomel after any flight) as not understanding those who recited hagomel only after flights (from the U.S.) to Europe or Israel
The Tzitz Eliezer [20], however, rules that hagomel is required only after a lengthy flight, such as one longer than 2 hours, irrespective of whether the journey is over the sea or not. Shorter flights do not require hagomel since the chance of danger is small.
The Yabia Omer [21] states that Sefardim (see above) should recite hagomel after any flight of 72 minutes or more (corresponding to the time it takes to walk a parsa).
The former Belzer Rebbe [22] ruled that after aeroplane flights hagomel should always be recited without mentioning Hashem's name and the attribute of His Kingship.
The B'tzel Hachochmo agrees to this ruling. He explains that even according to the opinion that the brocho is recited after any dangerous journey (not just the four cases in the Talmud), nevertheless the Shulchan Aruch explicitly states that this only applies if actual danger occurred (such as a wall falling on him). He therefore concludes that hagomel should not be said with Hashem's name and the attribute of His Kingship after the conclusion of a safe plane trip. If a dangerous situation did occur, hagomel should be said in full.
Sea travel ("yordei hayam") is one of the four cases, explicitly stated in the Talmud, requiring hagomel. There are differences of opinion as to whether this also refers to a river journey.
The Mishna Brura [23] rules that for Sefardim, for whom every journey is considered dangerous (see above), a river journey between cities would also be considered dangerous and hagomel required. Ashkenazim would not recite hagomel in such a case unless they actually encountered danger.
The Kaf Hachaim rules that the custom is that a short sea voyage does not require hagomel.
The B'tzel Hachochmo adds that completion of a journey where the ship did not travel far from shore in which case danger is remote does not require hagomel.
Reb Moshe Feinstein [24] and the Minchas Yitzchok [25] rule that even nowadays, with improvements in the safety of sea travel, hagomel is required, for although the sinking of a ship is a remote possibility it nevertheless can happen, and one should thank Hashem that it did not happen.
The Elya Rabbo [26] rules that one does not say hagomel until one has finished the journey completely, even though one has stopovers for a day or two during the journey.
The Yabia Omer [27] comments, in the case of a return trip, that the journey is not over completely until one has returned home - only then is one is completely out of danger. One says hagomel only at one's final destination.
The S'dei Chemed [28] suggests that the entire question of stopovers depends on one's intention and purpose. If one actually wishes to visit those places such as to visit the graves of tzadikim in a number of cities, one would need to say hagomel in each city. If, on the other hand, one is going there only to connect with other transportation and would have preferred bypassing the stopover altogether if possible, hagomel is not required there.
The Kaf Hachaim [29] qualifies the former case as applying only where one spends more than a day or two in the city - otherwise hagomel would not be required until reaching the final destination or returning home.
The Chido [30] quotes a discussion between his father, R. Azoulay, and R. Nachum Chatzar as to whether people who knowingly placed themselves in danger are obligated in hagomel afterwards. For instance, the Talmud relates a story of four great scholars who entered pardes (the inner mysteries of Torah) from which only Rabbi Akiva returned unharmed. Was Rabbi Akiva obligated to say hagomel? Were Yitzchok, after being rescued from the akeida, or the Kohen Gadol, after safely leaving Kodesh Hakodoshim on Yom Kippur, obligated?
R. Azoulay was of the opinion that since these people had all knowingly placed themselves in danger, hagomel was not required when they emerged safely.
R. Nachum considered hagomel was necessary since they had been in danger and had been saved.
The Tzitz Eliezer [31] suggests that R. Nachum would agree that hagomel was necessary in each of these cases since the person had placed himself in danger in accordance with the will of Hashem.
The Minchas Elozor [32] similarly rules that one who placed himself in danger for monetary gain should not recite hagomel afterwards. In a discussion regarding one who drank poison (to commit suicide) but was saved and recuperated, R. Flaji [33] rules that hagomel would be required, since the hagomel is on the fact that Hashem had mercy on the person and he recuperated. He argues that the form of the blessing "who bestows beneficences upon the culpable" is also consistent with the case of one who sinned and yet was saved.
The Tzitz Eliezer [34], however, based on the above Chido and Minchas Elozor, rules that such a person would not be able to recite hagomel, since, after all, he knowingly put himself in danger.
[1] Berachos 54b
[2] Orach Chayim 219
[3] Berachos Ch 9:13
[4] Hilchos Berachos Ch 10:8
[5] Orach Chayim 219, Biyur Halacha
[6] 219:7
[7] 219:10
[8] Ch 65
[9] 219:7
[10] Vol 1:13
[11] Vol 3 p313
[12] Mareches Berachos Ch 2:15
[13] Orach Chayim 110:30
[14] 219:9,10
[15] 219:7
[16] 219:10
[17] Sharai Halacha U'Minhag Vol 1 p217
[18] Orach Chayim Vol 2:59
[19] Vol 7:69
[20] Vol 11:14
[21] Vol 2:14
[22] see Chelkas Ya'akov Orach Chayim 55
[23] 219 Biyur Halacha
[24] loc.cit.
[25] Vol 4:11
[26] Orach Chayim 219
[27] Vol 2:13
[28] loc.cit.
[29] Orach Chayim 219:6
[30] Machzik Beracho Orach Chayim 219
[31] Vol 10 Ch 25:24
[32] Vol 4:47
[33] Lev Chayim Vol 3:53
[34] loc.cit.
The above is not intended to decide halachic questions, but rather to clarify them in a clear and concise form. Please refer all your practical questions to your local Rabbi.
Index of Practical Halacha Pages
Please note: Many hours of research is put into compiling "Issues in Practical Halacha" and we request that you do not reproduce them in any magazine, journal, newspaper or the like. If you wish to reproduce any issue please contact us.
Information on joining the Practical Halacha mail list may be found here.
The original hard copy and softcopy of this publication was produced on computer equipment purchased with a grant made possible by the Belfer family.
İMelbourn Kollel Menachem, June 2000
Melbourne Kollel Menachem
92 Hotham Street, East St Kilda, Vic., 3183 Australia
Havienu L'Shalom is pleased to host these Practical Halacha Web pages.
If you would like to support our efforts with a tax deductible donation, please send e-mail to:
İPage Layout and Design Havienu L'Shalom, June 2000