safeik brachos l'hakeil (2)

Last post discussed R' Ovadya's psak that if yaaleh v'yavo is omitted in bentching on y"t, one need not repeat.  You only repeat bentching when there is a chiyuv to eat bread, and since there is a machlokes rishonim whether there is a chiyuv to eat bread on y"t, we invoke the rule of safeik brachos l'hakeil.

R' Shalom Messas disagreed and argued that the root of the safeik here is a not a hil brachos safeik, but rather is a safeik in hilchos y"t -- must one eat bread or not.  In hil brachos, we say safeik brachos l'hakeil even against a rov because we are afraid of violating the d'oraysa of bracha she'eina tzericha.  In hil y"t (and all other areas), however, we pasken based on what rov poskim hold, and rov poskim hold that eating bread is required.

Rav Messas did not invent this sevara.  It is based on a Radbaz (vol 1 #229), who convincingly proves it from what we do every day:

כל מחלוקת שהוא בברכות עצמן יש לנו להקל כי שמא יוציא שם שמים לבטלה אבל מחלוקת בעשיית המצוה צריך לברך שהרי לדעת אותו פוסק שפיר מקיים המצוה. תדע שהרי מצות תפילין יש בה מחלוקת ולא ראינו מימינו מי שנמנע לברך עליהם ואפי' שלדעת ר"ת התפילין של רש"י ז"ל פסולין וכן לרש"י של ר"ת ז"ל פסולין לא ראינו לשום פוסק שיפקפק בברכה. וכן נהגו לברך על מקרא מגילה ביום אעפ"י שהר"ש חולק ואין זה דומה לספק ברכות ולא למחלוקת בברכות דהתם עיקר הספק או המחלוקת בברכה הילכך אזלינן לקולא אבל בעיקר עשיית המצוה לא נחלקו אלא מר אמר הכי הוא עשייתה ומר אמר הכי הוא ואנן כיון דנקיטינן כחד מינייהו זו היא עיקר המצוה ומברכין עליה ואפי' החולק מודה שאין זו ברכה לבטלה כיון דלדעת החולק זו היא עיקר המצוה ושמור עיקר זה שאם לא תאמר כן ברוב המצות לא נברך כיון דשכיח בהו פלוגתא דרבוותא:

Given that there is a machlokes Rashi and Rabeinu Tam as to the order of parshiyos in tefillin, how do say a bracha on tefillin every morning?  Safeik brachos l'hakeil?  In fact, it is almost impossible to think of a sugya where there is no machlokes on any detail, and yet that never prevents us from saying brachos. 

Not only in this Radbaz compelling mi'sevara, but R' Messas hoists R' Ovadya by his own petard and quotes places where R' Ovadya himself cites the Radbaz.  For example: there is a machlokes rishnonim (Rabeinu Tam vs BahaG) whether a sefer torah written without tagim is kosher.  The SA writes that such a sefer can be used.  R' Ovadya concludes (in Yabi'a Omer vol 10) that the olim can therefore say birchas hatorah on leining.  We don't treat the question of bracha as an independent question, and invoke the rule of safeik brachos l'hakeil.   The question of bracha as treated as an offshoot of the root question -- is the sefer kosher or not?  Once SA paskens a resolution of the root question, the bracha issue is resolved m'meila.  Why should bentching on y"t be any different?  Since SA resolves the question of whether one must eat bread l'chumra, m'meila one has to repeat bentching if one forgot yaaleh v'yavo.  One flows from the other; the question of bracha is not a separate question from the root issue.

R' Ovadya tried to deal with this in a few places, but acknowledges that it is a קושׁיא נכונה, which is not as faint praise as it sounds : )  After digging up this issue, I found R' Dvir Azulai, in his sefer Dvar Ani, talks about it and took advantage of a meeting with R' Yitzchak Yosef to ask him how to answer R' Messas' kashe.  R' YY offered two chilukim:

1) In the case of tefillin mentioned by Radbaz, or R' Ovadya's case of the questionable sefer torah, the person has not yet done the mitzvah.  The question that stands to be resolved therefore is whether or not putting on tefillin shel Rashi, or leining in the sefer without tagim, is acceptable or not.  In the case of bentching, the person already ate his meal.  The mitzvah is over.  The question at hand is whether the birchas ha'mazon after the fact is acceptable or not.  Therefore, we treat this case as a brachos issue.

2) In the case of tefillin mentioned by Radbaz, or R' Ovadya's case of the questionable sefer torah, we start with the fact that the person has a chezkas chiyuv to do the mitzvah.  The same rules of the SA that tell us how that chiyuv can be fulfilled -- by wearing tefillin shel Rashi or leining from a sefer torah without tagim -- also resolve the bracha question.  In the case of bentching, it is the chiyuv itself which is the subject of the question -- is there a chiyuv to eat bread or not?  Where the chiyuv itself is unclear, the rule of safeik bracha l'hakeil comes back into play.