Siman 128, Se'if 10 · Background: when the kohanim become obligated to bless

Shulchan Aruch, Siman 128, se'if 10:
"They stand on the duchan with their faces toward the Heichal and their backs toward the people, and their fingers are bent into their palms, until the shaliach tzibbur finishes Modim. Then, if there are two of them, he (the shaliach tzibbur) calls to them: 'Kohanim.'"
(Shulchan Aruch)

Background: when the kohanim become obligated to bless

• The obligation of the kohanim: Kohanim do not transgress the positive mitzvah until they are told to go up, meaning until someone calls out "Kohanim" to them, or until they wash their hands.
• The call as the trigger: One of the situations that obligates the kohanim to bless is when someone calls out "Kohanim" to them, and from here comes the whole discussion of who does the calling and how.
• The parentheses in the Shulchan Aruch's wording: The words "the shaliach tzibbur" appear in parentheses, because this does not fit every custom. Whoever reads the text without the parentheses is following the custom of the Shulchan Aruch, that is, the Sephardic custom.

Calling "Kohanim" and the question of an interruption in davening

"'If there are two' - because the verse says 'say to them,' meaning to tell the kohanim to bless Israel, and 'to them' implies two. And the shaliach tzibbur calls out 'Kohanim' and this is not considered an interruption in the tefillah, just as it is not considered an interruption when the shaliach tzibbur reads the words out to them one by one. The reason is that nesias kapayim is a need of the tefillah, like Kedushah."
(Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 34)

• The inference from the verse: The Torah says "say to them," from which we learn that an explicit instruction must be given to the kohanim, and the plural "to them" implies at least two.
• The difficulty: The shaliach tzibbur is in the middle of repeating the Amidah, and seemingly he may not add anything that is not part of Shemoneh Esrei. After all, in the silent Amidah one says neither the word "Kohanim" nor the verses of "Yevarechecha," so he is adding to the text of the tefillah.
• The resolution: Nesias kapayim is a need of the tefillah, just like Kedushah. The shaliach tzibbur is davening a tefillah that an individual cannot say, and whatever requires a minyan of ten is said by him as part of the tefillah, so it is not an interruption.
• The difference between the congregation and the shaliach tzibbur: The congregation answering Kedushah has already finished Shemoneh Esrei, whereas the shaliach tzibbur is standing in the middle of his own tefillah and nevertheless says Kedushah, which does not appear in the silent Amidah at all, because that is how Chazal established it.

The words of the Rema: saying "Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu"

"And he should not say 'Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu.' And some say it quietly up to the word 'Kohanim,' and then say that word aloud, and then go back and say 'am kedoshecha ka'amur' quietly. And this is the practice in these lands."
(Rema)

"'And he should not say Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu' - the reason is that it was only instituted for a time when the kohanim themselves are not blessing."
(Mishnah Berurah, s.k. 35)

• The Ashkenazic reasoning: When the kohanim themselves are about to bless, there is no place for the shaliach tzibbur to request "bless us with the threefold blessing in the Torah," since the blessing is actually being given right now by the kohanim.
• The practical result: If the shaliach tzibbur does not say this text, then he is silent, and somebody else is the one who calls out "Kohanim."

The two customs in practice

• The Sephardic custom: The chazzan says the entire text of "Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu," and when he reaches the word "Kohanim" he says it aloud, since that is the instruction to the kohanim, and then continues quietly with "am kedoshecha ka'amur." It is all part of the tefillah, and only the word "Kohanim" is emphasized. According to the wording of the Shulchan Aruch, this applies when there are two kohanim.
• The Ashkenazic custom: The chazzan does not say this text at all, since he may not add to the tefillah, and one of the congregation announces "Kohanim."

Who says "am kedoshecha ka'amur"

• The language of the Mishnah Berurah: It states that the shaliach tzibbur goes back and says "am kedoshecha ka'amur" quietly. According to the Ashkenazic custom this is not entirely clear, since someone else was the one who called out "Kohanim."
• Varying customs: In some places the one who says "am kedoshecha ka'amur" is the same person who announced "Kohanim," and in others the congregation says it. One cannot decide the matter from siddurim alone, since there are several customs here.
• A mistake to avoid: In places where the kohanim themselves say "am kedoshecha ka'amur," they are mistaken, because they cannot say this about themselves.

The approach of the Vilna Gaon and the Chazon Ish regarding calling out "Yevarechecha"

• The line of reasoning: If the shaliach tzibbur is limited to the text of the tefillah and may not add to it, as the Ashkenazim hold when they do not say "Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu," then reading out "Yevarechecha" word by word is also an addition. Therefore, according to the Vilna Gaon and others, the reading out should also be done by the same person who called out "Kohanim," and not by the shaliach tzibbur.
• The practice of the Chazon Ish: Someone who davened in his minyan related that the Chazon Ish would call out "Kohanim," and he himself would also read out "Yevarechecha" to them.
• In practice: This is not the practice in most Ashkenazic shuls, and the chazzan is the one who reads it out. Someone who sees a shul following the custom of the Vilna Gaon should know that they are not mistaken.
• Who is required to read it out: Birkas Kohanim is a Torah obligation, but the Torah said "say to them" without specifying who says it. There is no requirement that specifically the chazzan read it out; it is enough that one member of the congregation says it to them.

Nusach Sefard and the Sephardic custom

• The distinction: Those who daven Nusach Sefard are not Sephardim, and their custom is the Ashkenazic custom. People frequently get confused and apply to themselves whatever is written as "the Sephardic custom," meaning Edos HaMizrach, even though this is not Nusach Sefard.
• An example from the haftarah: Where the haftarah is marked "here the Sephardim stop," this does not include those who daven Nusach Sefard. The Rinat Yisrael siddur sometimes specifies "Edos HaMizrach" precisely in order to prevent this confusion.
• The same applies to Birkas Kohanim: According to the Shulchan Aruch, Sephardim say the entire text, and there are Ashkenazim who have picked up this custom and say the whole text while raising their voice at the word "Kohanim." Every custom has what to rely on, and each person should hold on to the custom he has received.

A chazzan who began saying "Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu" in a place where this is not the custom

• Do not stop him: If the shaliach tzibbur began the text even though there are kohanim present, there is no obligation to stop him, since he has already mentioned Hashem's Name, and stopping in the middle would result in a Name said in vain.
• How he should proceed: He should finish the text as the Sephardim do, provided that he says the word "Kohanim" aloud. No transgression has been committed, and even though this is not the local custom, everything is fine.

The influence of the custom outside Eretz Yisrael

• The reality abroad: There is no Birkas Kohanim there every day, and the chazzan says "Elokeinu v'Elokei Avoseinu, bless us with the threefold blessing" daily. It becomes second nature to him, so he continues saying it even when kohanim are present, and it may well be that there is no difference there between Sephardim and Ashkenazim in this.
• The explanation for those who do this in Eretz Yisrael: Some say that whoever does this in Eretz Yisrael, saying the whole text and raising his voice at the word "Kohanim," is doing so out of the influence of chutz la'aretz, since here in Eretz Yisrael there is Birkas Kohanim every day and there is no need for that whole introduction.

A single kohen: do we call out "Kohanim"?

• The wording of the verse: The Torah said "say to them" and not "say to him," which implies two. In Hebrew as well, "Kohanim" means at least two, and the term does not fit a single individual.
• The halachah in practice: In most cases, when there is only one kohen, we do not call out "Kohanim," because the Torah was addressing two.
• If someone did call out anyway: We do not rebuke him and it is no disaster, since there are places in Hebrew where the plural is used with a singular intent, such as "and the sons of Dan: Chushim," where he had only one son.

In passing · The text "bless us with the threefold blessing in the Torah written by the hand of Moshe Your servant"

There is a major disagreement about where the phrase breaks and what the word "threefold" means.

• The first understanding: "Bless us with the blessing that is threefold in the Torah," and then "written by the hand of Moshe Your servant." According to this, "threefold in the Torah" refers to the three verses in the Torah: three blessings and three verses.
• The difficulty with this understanding: In a Sefer Torah there is no marking of verses at all. The resolution: the verses are known from the ta'amim, the cantillation, which indicate where each verse ends, and even though they are not written in, there are three verses here.
• The second understanding: The break comes after the word "threefold": "bless us with the threefold blessing," and then "in the Torah written by the hand of Moshe Your servant." According to this, the blessing itself is threefold, and there is no need specifically for three verses in the Torah.
• A note on counting the blessings: If one looks carefully at the content, there are six requests in the blessing, since "May Hashem bless you and guard you" is two, and so on with the rest.
• The practical difference: There is not much difference between the two understandings. Some read the text in one breath so that it is not noticeable where they pause, and some are careful to pause one way or the other.

In passing · A further explanation based on "shnayim mikra v'echad targum"

• The background: The Gemara says that a person should always complete his weekly parashah shnayim mikra v'echad targum, twice the text and once the translation, and the targum is Onkelos. Some today use Rashi instead, because they do not understand the language of the targum.
• A halachic question: In verses where the targum is identical to the Hebrew, such as names of people and places (Reuven, Shimon, Levi and Yehudah), must one say them three times, or is twice enough, since the third time adds nothing to the Hebrew?
• The view of Tosafos: Even where the targum adds nothing, one says it, and reads shnayim mikra v'echad targum.
• The novel reading of our text: There are versions in which Onkelos did not translate Birkas Kohanim and left it in its original wording. Based on this, some explained "threefold in the Torah" to mean that when one reads it in the Torah shnayim mikra v'echad targum, he says it three times.

(This explanation was offered as a sharp, clever reading, and only because of the difficulty in understanding the phrase "threefold in the Torah.")

• A comment from the audience: It would seemingly have been simpler to word it "written three times," and then no disagreement would have arisen.
• The answer: The term "threefold" appears in Scripture and in Chazal in place of saying "three times," for example "eglah meshuleshes," which was expounded either as a calf in its third year or as three calves, and from there also "a threefold blessing."