I was reading some of the laws of brachot and saw this statement:
This Hatima, with which we conclude "long" B'rakhot (i.e. B'rakhot which have a lot of text and/or mention several themes within the text), consists of "Barukh atah YHVH,"
I wonder, "Why?" If the peticha of a bracha (that has a peticha) is (as the site continues)
Petiha (Introduction): to properly set the frame of reference - God, who is King, is being blessed for event X, Mitzva Y or pleasure Z. Hatima (Conclusion): In case the B'rakha has thematically encompassed more than one idea and has involved a signficant "liturgical" distance from the Introduction, a conclusion is necessary in order to "realign" the B'rakha with its main intent and goal - praising God for a specific event, Mitzva or pleasure.
Then why does the Chatima not have to "properly set the frame of reference"? Why does the chatima only invoke shem, not malchut?
The only answers I have gotten have been "because that's how they wrote it" and "why would you think it HAS to have both."
To the former I say "So the structure was arbitrary?" And I get no answer. To the latter, I say "I would think it has to do what a bracha has to do, as the site says, properly set the frame of reference."
I know that there are things we say for which we delete both shem and malchut, but why structure with only 1 and not the other?