Siman 216

It is stated in Berakhot (43b): From where do we know that one recites a blessing over a scent? As it is said: "Let every soul praise the Lord." What is it that the soul derives benefit from, but the body does not derive benefit from? You must say this is the scent. That is to say, we should not say that a blessing is only required for something that enters into the body, like eating and drinking where the benefit is felt, and in which case it is appropriate to say that it is forbidden to benefit from this world without a blessing, but not for a mere scent which does not enter the body at all; for this reason he expounds from the verse that there is an obligation of a blessing even over a good scent. And he called it the benefit of the soul because, relative to eating and drinking, it is a spiritual pleasure attributed to the soul and not to the body. Therefore, as it were, it is also written regarding the Holy One, blessed be He: "A pleasing scent to the Lord," therefore it is called 'scent' because it is a spiritual matter.

Therefore, just as it is forbidden for an Israelite to derive benefit from food and drink prior to a blessing, so too it is forbidden to derive benefit from a pleasant fragrance prior to reciting a blessing. And he should recite the blessing prior to the fragrance, just as he recites a blessing prior to eating and drinking. And even though they are not identical—for regarding eating and drinking, if he recites the blessing afterward, it would not be "prior to their performance," whereas regarding fragrance he can smell and smell again—nevertheless, the primary obligation of the blessing is prior to smelling, as in eating and drinking (Bach). And it is obvious that in this regard it is not identical to eating and drinking if he did not recite the blessing beforehand; for if he ate and drank without a blessing, it is forbidden to recite the blessing afterward, but regarding fragrance this is not applicable, as he may recite the blessing and smell further. And regarding fragrance there is only a first blessing and not a final blessing, for it is a minimal benefit; that is to say, every final blessing requires a measure of a kezayit or a revit, and regarding fragrance this is not applicable (so it appears to me to be the intent of Rashi in Niddah 52a, and the Taz in subsection 1 explained that it is because it is similar to that which has been digested in his intestines, see there, and I do not know why he found this necessary).

And because it is a minor pleasure, therefore eating and drinking take precedence over it if both come before him at once, as the Tur wrote at the end of siman 212: "If they brought before him wine and good oil to smell, he holds the wine in his right hand and blesses upon it first, and afterward he takes the oil in his right hand and blesses." Thus far his words. And so it is in the Gemara (43b). And for this reason, we do not recite the blessing of 'shehecheyanu' over a scent, and also because it persists from year to year (Magen Avraham, subsection 1). And behold, there are several types of pleasures for which we do not recite a blessing, such as washing in hot water and anointing, and likewise for pleasant singing or for the light of a candle when one sits in the dark alone on Motzaei Shabbat and the like, because any pleasure that does not enter the body does not require a blessing. Nevertheless, scent is different, for the spirituality within it enters into his body and all the organs are affected by it; however, it is a spiritual pleasure, and therefore they characterized it as a pleasure of the soul, and it is not similar to all that we have reckoned.

There are those who wondered why we do not recite a blessing upon inhaling the smoke of tobacco in the mouth or in the nostrils, even though they contain pleasant scents. And this is no wonder at all, for it is known that the primary purpose of this thing is not done for its pleasant scent; on the contrary, it is strong and bitter to the point that there are many people, and especially women, who cannot tolerate this scent at all. It was originally made for the healing of the stomach, to nullify thoughts, and to pass the time. Therefore, even if there is one who mixes a pleasant scent into it, his intention is not for the sake of the pleasant scent, but rather to dispel the strong and bitter scent that is in the tobacco, and it is like the perfumes of a latrine upon which one does not recite a blessing, as will be explained in siman 217.

Just as there are several types of blessings for foods, in order to bless each and every type with a blessing appropriate to its kind, so too regarding fragrance, one must recite the blessing of fragrance according to the object from which the scent originates. How so: if that from which the scent emanates is a tree or a species of tree—one blesses "Who creates fragrant trees," meaning that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created trees that give off a good scent. And if it is a herb—one blesses "Who creates fragrant herbs," and if it is a fruit that is eaten and gives off a good scent like an etrog or a good apple—one blesses "Who gives a good scent to fruits." And if it is neither a species of tree nor a species of herb nor a species of fruit, such as musk which is a species of animal—one blesses "Who creates types of fragrance," and this is a general blessing like "by Whose word all things exist" regarding eating and drinking. Therefore, just as there, if one said over all of them "by Whose word all things exist" he has fulfilled his obligation, so too regarding fragrance, if one said over all of them "Who creates types of fragrance" he has fulfilled his obligation. And just as there, regarding a matter whose blessing is in doubt one blesses "by Whose word all things exist," so too regarding fragrance one blesses "Who creates types of fragrance" which is a general blessing. But if one blessed over a species of tree "Who creates fragrant herbs" or vice versa—he has not fulfilled his obligation and must repeat the blessing, and likewise regarding the fragrance in fruits. Therefore, we always bless on Saturday night "Who creates types of fragrance" and we are not exacting regarding the source of the spices, because we are not so expert, and with this blessing one fulfills the obligation for all types of fragrance as I have written.

That which we have said, that one who smells a fruit which has a pleasant fragrance recites a blessing, this is when he took it now to smell it or if his intention was to eat it and also to smell it. But if he took it to eat it and not to smell it, even though it automatically emits a pleasant fragrance—he does not recite a blessing, for it is not designated for fragrance; therefore, his intention must be for the sake of fragrance. However, with items designated for fragrance, even if his intention is not for the fragrance but rather that he takes it to place it in another location, since a pleasant fragrance emanates from it—he recites a blessing (so it is explicitly stated from the Magen Avraham, subsection 5, and from the Shulchan Aruch there). Nevertheless, in practice it requires further study, for since he does not intend to smell, why should he recite a blessing? And if it is because it is a "psik reisha" that he smells it against his will, it seems that this reasoning does not apply regarding a blessing (however, from Pesachim 25b it implies explicitly that "possible and not intending" is like "intending" according to Rava, see there; therefore, it seems to me that if it is possible for him not to hold it and move it, he must recite a blessing, and if it is impossible for him, such as if he needs the space and the like, it is "impossible and not intending" and he does not need to recite a blessing, and delve into this).

When one takes a fruit to eat and to smell it, there is one who says that he should prioritize the blessing of eating over the blessing of smelling (Olat Tamid), for the blessing of eating takes precedence. And there is one who says that since the smell comes to him immediately, he prioritizes the blessing of smelling (Eliyah Rabbah subsection 6), and so it appears to be the primary view. And regarding an etrog of the mitzvah during the festival of Sukkot, some say that it is forbidden to smell it because it was set aside for its mitzvah all the days of the festival, and some say that it is permitted to smell it, for it was only set aside from eating and not from smelling. Therefore, it is proper not to smell it, and if he does smell it, he does not recite a blessing, for in a case of doubt regarding blessings, one is lenient (Magen Avraham subsection 22). And know that regarding what we said, that over a fruit which has a good scent one recites "Who gives a good scent to fruits," even if the fruit is not fit for eating except through a mixture, nevertheless it is called a fruit of eating and we recite this blessing (ibid. subsection 4).

Over nutmeg, which is the primary fruit, and over cinnamon which they call "tzimring," and cloves which are "negelach," even though it is not the primary fruit, nevertheless since its essence is intended for eating, the name "fruit" is upon it regarding its fragrance. And so too for all types of spices whose essence is for eating, even though they require preparation, nevertheless one recites "Who gives a good fragrance to fruits." But over the rose which they call "roza," and over the cinnamon which is "India wood," and over rose water which they call "rosin wasser," and over frankincense and mastic—which is a type of resin that drips from a tree—and their like, one recites "Who creates fragrant trees." And even though they are fit for eating by means of a preserve, nevertheless their essence is not intended for eating but rather for smelling. Therefore, one recites "Who creates fragrant trees" since they are a type of tree and not a type of herb. And so too for anything whose stalk is hard, it is included in the category of tree and not in the category of herb.

Over balsam oil, which is a very precious oil and its growth is only in Eretz Yisrael, and for the honor of Eretz Yisrael they instituted over it a specific berakhah: "Who creates pleasant oil." And olive oil that one crushed or ground until because of this its fragrance began to waft—one recites over it "Who creates fragrant trees," for the olive is a tree. But other oils that do not grow on a tree, if their fragrance wafts from their own essence—their berakhah is "Who creates types of fragrance" and not "fragrant trees," for they are not from a tree. And if they placed types of fragrance in the oil because of which their fragrance wafts, like the anointing oil that was in the Mikdash, if they perfumed the oil with fragrant trees—one recites "Who creates fragrant trees," and if with fragrant herbs—one recites "Who creates fragrant herbs," for we follow the perfuming when the perfuming remains there in the oil, and if there were trees and fragrances in it—one recites "Who creates types of fragrance." And if one strained it and removed the fragrances from it, some say that one recites over it "Who creates pleasant oil" just as over balsam, because the oil became pleasant through this, and some say that one does not recite a berakhah over it at all, because this pleasantness is not from it but rather it absorbed from another thing and it is like a fragrance that has no source and one does not recite a berakhah over it, and it is like the incense of vessels that will be explained in siman 217 that one does not recite a berakhah over it for a reason similar to this, see there. And since it is a doubt, it is proper to be careful not to smell it, and if he smelled it he does not recite a berakhah, for a doubt regarding berakhot is to be lenient. And there is one who says that he recites "Who creates types of fragrance" (Bach), for they are not similar to incensed vessels which did not absorb the fragrance from the essence of the perfume, and here there is only a doubt regarding the berakhah and "Who creates types of fragrance" exempts everything (ibid.), and there are facets to here and to there (see Magen Avraham subsection 13, and the Taz in siman 217 subsection 2 wrote not to recite a berakhah, see there).

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 7: "Simlak and chilfei de-yama — one recites 'borei atzei besamim'. Simlak: some interpret it as rosemary and some interpret it as jasmine, and some interpret it as a herb that has three rows of leaves, one above the other, and for each row three leaves. And chilfei de-yama is spikenard which they call espic," and this is spighenard (Taz). "Sigli, and they are violets — 'borei esvei besamim'; nargis, which is the lily, and some say it is the liria: if it grows in a garden — 'borei atzei besamim', and if it grows in a field — one recites 'borei esvei besamim'." Thus far his words. And we do not know these species at all. And regarding 'esvei', one must say the ayin with a chirik, the shin with a sheva, and the beit with a tzeirei (Taz subsection 12). And the reason for the difference between that which grows in a garden and that which grows in a field is that in a garden they water and guard it even when the wood has dried out, therefore its blessing is 'atzei besamim'; but in a field they do not water it and do not watch over it, and it does not endure except in its softness and when it is a herb, and therefore its blessing is 'esvei besamim'.

If there were before him fragrant trees, fragrant herbs, and types of fragrances, he recites over each one the blessing appropriate to it, just as with types of foods, where one should not include them all ab initio in the blessing of "she-hakol," and so too here one should not include them in "minei besamim," and he recites the blessing over "atzei" first, and afterward "isvei," and afterward "minei besamim." And from the Tur it appears that regarding fragrances, when they are all before him—he recites "borei minei besamim" and it exempts everything. And his reasoning appears to be that they are not similar to foods, for the scent comes from all of them as one and he must recite the blessing over everything as one. And our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 10, and this is his wording: "And if he recited 'minei besamim' over all of them—he has fulfilled his obligation." Thus far his words. And it is not understood what he is teaching us, for this has already been explained in section 1, rather his intention is that it is permitted to do so ab initio.

If they brought before him hadas and oil to smell: if their blessings are equal—he blesses over the hadas and exempts the oil, for hadas is more significant than oil, and this is according to the version of the Rif and the Rambam. And according to the version of Rashi and Tosafot (43b), he blesses over the oil and exempts the hadas. And if their blessings are not equal—he blesses over the hadas first and takes it in his right hand, for that which he blesses over he must hold in his right hand, as the blessing of the hadas is 'atzei besamim' and is more significant, just as 'borei pri ha'etz' precedes 'shehakol' (and the difficulty of the Magen Avraham, subsection 19, is answered).

In the time of the Shas, they would bring mugmar at the conclusion of the meal and place coals upon them so that the scent would rise before those reclining; and from when does one recite the blessing over the mugmar? From the moment the pillar of its smoke rises, before the scent reaches him, so that the blessing shall be immediately prior to their performance. However, he should not recite the blessing before the pillar of smoke rises, for we require it to be adjacent to its performance, as I wrote in siman 25 regarding tefillin; see there. The mugmar is also subject to the law of all perfumes: if they are of wood, he recites "Who creates fragrant trees," and even though the scent comes after their burning, nevertheless their essence is of wood. And if they are of herb, he recites "Who creates fragrant herbs," and if of other species, "Who creates species of fragrance." And among us, there is mugmar where they take small black rounds from the apothecary and place them in the morning on the windows, and light them, and they give off a good scent. And if the intention is for the sake of the scent, he recites "Who creates species of fragrance," and if the intention is to remove foul odors, he does not need a blessing, as will be explained in siman 217.

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote at the end of this siman: "There are those who say that one who smells warm bread should recite the blessing 'Who placed a pleasant fragrance in bread,' and there are those who say that one should not recite a blessing over it; therefore, one should not smell it." Thus far his words. And I do not understand what pleasant fragrance there is in bread, and perhaps it refers to bread made with butter and spices, but in our days we have never heard of reciting a blessing over this, and many pleasant fragrances arise from types of cooked foods when they are warm and we do not recite a blessing over them, for the intent is not for the sake of the fragrance. And it appears that one who smells fruit peels that have a pleasant fragrance, such as oranges and the like, if his intent is to smell - he must recite the blessing 'Who gives a pleasant fragrance to fruits.'