אשר המקמות כל את תאבדון אבד” ירשים אתם אשר הגוים שם עבדו הרמים ההרים על אלהיהם את אתם (ב יב) “רענן עץ כל ותחת הגבעות ועל
In this passuk, we are commanded to abolish and rid the world of avodah zarah (Sanhedrin 90a), and those who count the mitzvos listed this as a mitzvas aseh in the order of the 613 mitzvos (Sefer Hamitzvos LaRambam Aseh 185; Sefer Hachinuch 436).
We need to clarify whether Chazal instituted to make a brachah on fulfilling this mitzvah like the other mitzvos aseh. The Mishnah in Brachos (54a) says: “One who sees a place where the avodas kochavim was uprooted says: ‘Baruch [Atah Hashem Elokeinu Melech Ha’olam] shene’ekrah avodas kochavim me’artzeinu.” It is a brachah of shevach, praise, but it is not explained whether the one who does the uprooting also has to recite a brachah on the mitzvah.
The Maharsha (ibid Vol. I 57b) writes that indeed, we recite the brachah for fulfilling this mitzvah as we make a brachah on the other mitzvos, and therefore, one who uproots avodah zarah makes
Continue on page 3
Continued section Derech Emunim
the brachah: “Baruch ...Asher Kidshanu...la’akor avodah zarah mei’artzeinu.” But Harav Binyamin Rabinowitz, the Rav of Wilkomir, asks: One of the rules of the birchos hamitzvos instituted by Rabbi Yosef Ibn Platt (cited in Avudraham Birchas Hamitzvos Sha’ar 3), is that one does not recite a brachah for a mitzvah whose fulfillment is only made possible by an act of sin that precedes it. Therefore, for example, we do not make a brachah on the mitzvah of returning a stolen object, because this can only be fulfilled following the act of stealing that preceded it. If so, how can we make a brachah on eradicating avodah zarah? Even if it is done by non-Jews, for them it is also considered a sin, because the prohibition of avodah zarah is included in the Seven Noahide laws.
The son of the Adere”s answered that the words of Rabbi Yosef Ben Platt are said only for a mitzvah whose fulfilment comes following a sin that a Jew committed, of which it is not fitting to recite a brachah, but when a mitzvah is done by a Jew following the sin of a non-Jew, it is fitting that he make a brachah over it.
The Margaliyos Hayam notes a distinction between the mitzvah of returning a stolen object, that the thief himself performs, therefore it is not fitting that he should make a brachah for a deed that comes following his own sins. But the avodah zarah was done by someone else. Even if a Jew did it, the one who destroys it has no connection to the sin, so surely he can make the brachah.
Maharsh”a Brachos Vol. I 57b; Bnei Binyamin on the Rambam Avodah Zarah 7a; Mekor Habrachah p. 10
