Explanation: The Medrash Tanchuma, commenting on the Pasuk in Bereishis "And G-d created man", cites Rebbi Bun, who states 'with wisdom' - in that He first prepared his sustenance before creating him.

Support: And this is what the Gemara in Sanhedrin at the end of Perek Echad Dinei Mamonos (Daf 38.) is referring to when it says 'Hashem created Adam on Erev Shabbos so that he should be able to eat his Se'udah immediately'.

Conclusion: Which is why they instituted the wording ' ... who created Adam with wisely'.

Source: Because we say in Bereishis Rabah (which commenting on the Pasuk in Tehilim " ... for You are great, and You work wonders; You alone are G-d"), explains as follows:

Explanation: When a man makes a flask, even if it contains just one hole the size of a tiny needle, the air will escape and it can no longer retain (the wine) it. And Hakadosh-Baruch-Hu created a man full of holes, yet the air inside him does not escape!'

Clarification: The same applies even if one did not actually hear it ...

Reason: Since this B'rachah merely concerns the distinction, and on the benefit of the light which the rooster is able to distinguish, as it benefits from the light.

Clarification: The same will apply to any hat and to any form of head-covering.

Qualification: This is confines however, to where one benefits from it.

Qualification (cont.): If one does not, such as where one has been lying in bed fully-clothed, one recites neither this B'rachah nor that of 'Malbish Arumim', nor any other B'rachah of this nature.

Source: As is implied in the third Perek of Megilah (Daf 24:) regarding the case of 'Someone who has never seen light in his life', since everyone agrees there that one must benefit from the light in order to recite a B'rachah over it.

Reason: Since one begins to lay Tefilin on one's arm one recites over the Tefilin shel Yad 'Lehani'ach ... '; whereas on the shel Rosh, one recites 'Al Mitzvas ... ', and not 'Lehani'ach ... '.

Reason (cont.): Seeing as one has already begun to lay one of them.

Gemara Menachos: In Perek ha'Kometz (Daf 36. & :) the Gemara states that 'If one did not speak, one recites one B'rachah; whereas if one did, one recites two'.

Explanation #1: And Rashi explains there that the Gemara is referring to both Tefilin - that someone who did not speak recites only one B'rachah over both Tefilin.

Refutation: It is a big Dochek however - to confine the recital of two B'rachos 'Lehani'ach' and 'al Mitzvas' to where one spoke and transgressed an Aveirah!

Explanation #2: Rabeinu Tam therefore explains that over the shel Rosh , which constitutes the completion of the Mitzvah, and it is the main one, since it contains four Batim as well as a 'Shiyn', one recites 'al Mitzvas ... '.

Explanation #2 (cont.): And if one spoke, one goes back and recites both B'rachos over the shel Rosh.

Support: And this is also the opinion of the Shimusha Rabahof the Ge'onim.

Explanation #2 (cont.): According to the explanation of Rabeinu Tam, with regard to 'If one spoke, one recites two B'rachos' - someone who lays the shel Rosh only, since the one does not hold back the other, must recite two B'rachos.

Implied Question: And the reason why the Gemara does not refer to a case where one does so ...

Answer: Is because it is unsusual to wear one Tefilah without the other, seeing as 'Tefilin are readily available in the house bar Chavu', as the Gemara says in Bava Metzi'a (Daf 29:).

Conclusion: And so Rabeinu Tam wrote specifically in his Teshuvos, as did R. Elchanan in his explanation on Tefilah.