to

Which is preferable:

"Time has helped me understand what happened."

"Time has helped me to understand what happened."

(this is prosaic narrative, wherin the preceeding sentance could be something like "Five years ago a horrible tragedy struck my family.")

Obviously it is the passage of time which (among other unamed things) allows me to reach the understanding. But in my particular style of writing, which is not academic, a proper sentance such as "the passage of time has allowed me to reach an understanding of what happened" would become cumbersome.

Initially I thought the "to" was unnecessary, but now I wonder if "to" serves a logical purpose by removing the notion that "time" is the cause and "understand" is the effect

If I help a woman walk across the street, am I literally moving her legs for her? If I help a woman to walk across the street, it seems that I might be doing other things, such as holding her arm or guiding her through a crowd of pedestrians.