Closely related (particular example of): What is the meaning of Davar Shebakedusha?

The Aruch Hashulchan notes that the wedding blessings require ten men, but are not a 'davar shebikdusha' (E.H. 62:11). What about bentching? If yes, why doesn't it make the Rambam's list of devarim shebikdusha (Hilchos Tefillah 8:4)? If not, why are ten men required to use Hashem's name?


2 Answers 2


The relevant Gemara here is on Megilla 23b. The Mishna there lists a number of things which require a Minyan. The Gemara explains that "all Devarim SheBikdusha" require a Minyan (based on some verses). It then gives reasons for requiring a Minyan in the last few instances of the Mishna (including Zimmun beShem and Birkat Chatanim), namely, that it isn't appropriate ("אורח ארעא" the way of the land) to say those without a Minyan.

The Arukh haShulchan you cite seems to be understanding that the last things on the list are not Devarim SheBikdusha even though they require a Minyan and that's why there is an additional reasoning brought. So he would answer your question in the negative.

My own thought: the Gemara in a number of places (eg. MK 28b, Nedarim 62) lists among the things which a Kohein get precedence in both Devarim SheBikdusha and first rights at "blessing" (let's work with most Rishonim that this refers to leading Zimmun). Perhaps we could argue that it needed to specify this because leading Zimmun is not a Davar SheBikdusha. (This only works if we take לפתוח ראשון like Rashi in Gittin 59 unlike Rashi in Horayot 12.)

  • no comment on the Rambam, huh? That's what I was really after... though I guess you answered the question Jan 12, 2015 at 6:20
  • @Matt The AhS would say the Rambam agrees with him, no? (Btw I don't think the AhS's read is so muchrach, but it's hard to tell without any relevant NM of DsbK.)
    – Double AA
    Jan 12, 2015 at 6:20
  • I guess, assuming that the Aruch Hashulchan would say that bentching is not a davar shebikdusha. It happens to be that the Kesef Mishnah explicitly states (b'daas haRambam) that it is, so I was hoping for a bit more Jan 12, 2015 at 6:21
  • 1
    @Matt That's what you get for not asking for exactly what you wanted.
    – Double AA
    Jan 12, 2015 at 6:24
  • 1
    Right about that, but I'm not in the mood to write a 1000-word question Jan 12, 2015 at 6:25

The Mishna (megillah 23b) there lists a number of things which require 10 men, and includes saying God's name in the zimun for birkas hamazon. The Gemara then goes on to explain the reason for everything on the list: all "Devarim SheBikdusha" require a minyan (based on some verses), and, in the last few instances, (including Zimmun beShem and Birkat Chatanim), the reason is that it isn't appropriate ("אורח ארעא" the way of the land) to say those without a minyan. Thus, the implication appears to be that, while all devarim shebikdusha require a minyan, not all things that require a minyan are a Davar SheBikduasha, and zimun seems to belong in the latter category. This is most likely the Aruch Hashulchan's reading of the Gemara.

However, the Mishnah Berurah (199:15) and Kaf Hachayim (199:20) statee explicitly that Birkas HaZimun is actually a Davar SheBikdusha, based on the Levush, and this appears to be the position of the Kesef Mishnah (Hil. Berachos 5:7) as well.

  • 2
    "and this appears to be the position of the Kesef Mishnah". He also says this in Beit Yosef (199): והטעם שאין מזמנין בשם דהוי דבר שבקדושה וכל דבר שבקדושה לא יהא אלא בעשרה אנשים גדולים. | The Rokeach (Hil. T'filla 8:4) is one rishon who explicitly says that zimmun b'Shem is not a davar shebikdusha: דברכת המזון לא הוי דבר שבקדושה גמור כמו קדיש וקדושה ובפ' הקורא את המגילה עומד דף כ"ג מוכח להדיא דברכת זימון אינו דבר שבקדושה ומאי דבעי עשרה אינו אלא משום דלאו אורח ארעא כיון דבעו לאדכורי שם שמים. The Ritva (B'rachos 45b) also implies this: שהזימון כעין דבר שבקדושה הוא ואינו נוהג בפחות משלושה.
    – Fred
    Jan 12, 2015 at 6:56
  • Thanks a lot @Fred, I was looking for that Ritva (which I thought was a Rashba and therefore couldn't find it) Jan 12, 2015 at 6:58
  • @Fred Those look like parts of an answer. Matt +1 for the end but i'm not sure what your first paragraph is adding beyond my answer.
    – Double AA
    Jan 12, 2015 at 6:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .