Chapter 7: General laws of Bracha Rishona of Birchas Hanehnin[1]

*For the general rules applicable to all blessings, see Chapter 2; For laws applicable to Birchas Hamitzvos, see volume 2; For laws applicable to a Bracha Achrona, see Chapter 21

The sages established six different blessings for six different groups of foods.

1. The blessing of Hamotzi is to be recited over bread as will be explained in length in chapter 8.
2. The blessing of Mezonos is to be recited over five grain products, as will be explained in length in chapter 10.
3. The blessing of Hagafen is to be recited over beverages that derive from grapes, as will be explained in length in chapter 15.
4. The blessing of Haeitz is to be recited over fruits of the tree, as will be explained in length in chapter 12.
5. The blessing of Ha’adama is to be recited over vegetables and fruits of the ground, as will be explained in length in chapter 12.
6. The blessing of Shehakol is to be recited over all other food products, as will be explained in length in chapter 13.

1. Shiur of Bracha Rishona:[2]

[Unlike the law by an after blessing, to be explained in Chapter 21] there is no minimum required measurement of food that must be consumed prior to the recital of a before blessing prior to eating or drinking, and thus even a mere taste of a minute amount of food requires a blessing to be said beforehand.[3] [This however only applies if one swallows the food, as explained in Halacha 5.] Only regarding an after blessing was a measurement of consumption required.

Birchas Hamotzi:[4] The blessing of Hamotzi has no minimum measurement of consumption required just as is the law by all before blessings, and thus even if one desires to only eat a mere crumb of bread which is less than a Kezayis, nevertheless he needs to say the blessing of Hamotzi beforehand.[5] The reason for this is because the Shiur of a Kezayis was only given regarding Birchas Hamazon, and other after blessings and not by a before blessing. [Nevertheless, due to other reasons, some Poskim[6] rule that during a meal one is to initially eat a Kezayis of bread immediately after the blessing. Practically, however, we do not suspect for this opinion.[7]]

• Example: Chaim sits down at the Shabbos table and wishes to partake in the meal. He takes a small crumb of challah—much less than the size of an olive (Kezayis)—and recites the blessing of Hamotzi before eating it. Although he only eats a tiny amount, the blessing is still required beforehand. However, if Chaim wants to say the after-blessing (Birchas Hamazon), he would need to eat at least a Kezayis of bread.

2. Kavanah – Paying attention to the words upon reciting a blessing:[8]

One must be very careful in the concentration he has upon reciting a blessing, so that he understand the words that he is saying, that he is a blessing G-d, and that he understands what he is blessing G-d for. His heart should not be distracted with other matters while reciting the blessing. See Chapter 2 Halacha 1!

Sparks of Kabbalah:[9]

The main comprehension one receives in Ruach Hakodesh is dependent on ones concentration that he has upon reciting blessings over pleasures, as through these blessings one nullifies the Kelipos found in the foods that he eats. This in turn refines the persons soul and body and makes him a receptacle to receive the Kedusha. Thus, one must be very careful in his recital of Birchas Hanehnin.

• Example: Rivka sits down to eat a piece of bread. Before taking her first bite, she pauses, closes her eyes for a moment, and focuses on the words of the blessing: “Baruch Atah Hashem, Elokeinu Melech ha’olam, haMotzi lechem min ha’aretz.” She thinks about how she is thanking G-d for providing bread and sustenance. During the blessing, she avoids thinking about anything else—her errands, her phone, or even the taste of the bread—so that her heart and mind are fully present. Through this mindful blessing, Rivka not only fulfills a mitzvah but also, according to Kabbalah, brings a spiritual refinement upon herself and her meal.

3. Being Motzi another person:

See Chapter 4 Halacha 2C and 5 for the full details of this subject!

The custom is for every person to say their own blessing by all foods and drinks other than bread and wine, and not fulfill their obligation with the blessing of others.[10] However, from the letter of the law, one can be Yotzei a before blessing from another if they are in a state of Kevius and both had intention to be Yotzei Motzi with the blessing. However, this only applies if the person saying the blessing is personally obligated in a Bracha Rishona. However, if he is not personally obligated in a Bracha Rishona then he may not recite a before blessing on behalf of another person who is eating a food or beverage, even if the other person does not know how to say the blessing themselves.[11] Likewise, if they are not Kavua together, one cannot be Yotzei the blessing with another.[12]

• Example: Two friends, Yaakov and Moshe, sit together to eat a sandwich. Yaakov recites the blessing out loud, both intend for this to cover them, and both are eating. In this case, Moshe fulfills their obligation. If they weren’t eating together or didn’t share intent, each would need to say their own blessing.

4. Hefsek – Making an interruption between the blessing and eating or drinking:[13]
5. The speaking prohibition:[14]

By all blessings, it is forbidden to make an interval [of speech of even one word[15]] between a blessing and the eating. One may not speak until the food is swallowed, as explained in Halacha 5. [Thus, one must eat and swallow the food, or drink the beverage, right after reciting the blessing without making any interval in between. Once one has swallowed any amount of the food after the blessing, an interval may be made.[16]]

One who is being Yotzei a Bracha with another:[17] Just as one who recites a blessing may not speak between the blessing and eating, so too one who is being Yotzei a blessing with another person [such as one who hears Hagafen from another], may not speak until he eats and swallows the food [even if he plans to repeat the blessing[18]]. It does not suffice for the person who recited the blessing to eat and swallow the food, as also the person who is fulfilling the blessing through hearing it from him must eat and swallow the food prior to speaking.[19]

• Example: Chaim sits down to eat bread at Shabbat dinner with his family. After washing his hands, he recites the blessing of “Hamotzi lechem min haaretz” over the challah. As soon as he finishes the blessing, his young child tries to ask him a question. Chaim gently signals for silence and takes a bite of the challah before saying anything in response. Only after he chews and swallows does he answer his child, making sure to avoid any interruption between the blessing and the eating, as Jewish law requires.

Speaking in middle of a blessing:[20] Just as it is forbidden to speak between a blessing and the eating or drinking, so too it is forbidden to speak of any matter within the middle of a short blessing. Even Bedieved, one who speaks in between is not Yotzei the blessing.[21] Furthermore, by the middle of a blessing, this prohibition applies even if he spoke of matters that relate to the food or blessing, nonetheless, the blessing is invalid and must be repeated.[22] Hence, even intervening with Amen or Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo in the middle of a blessing possibly invalidates it no matter where the person intervened.[23] [Certainly, one may not tell people “Shah” to be quiet in middle of a blessing. See Q&A! Nevertheless, Bedieved if one answered Amen or Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo in middle of the blessing, even in between G-d’s name and kingship, one is not to repeat the blessing although he is to try to hear it from someone else.]

Speaking between bites or between two foods or beverages: The entire prohibition of making an interval only applies during the recital of a blessing, or between the blessing and the eating and drinking. However, once one has chewed and swallowed some of the food or beverage after the blessing has been said, it is now permitted for him to speak without limit prior to eating a second serving of that food or prior to eating another food that was included in that same blessing. Doing so is not considered an interval that requires a new blessing to be repeated prior to eating the second food. [This is unlike the law regarding Mitzvos, in which we rule that speaking prior to completing the Mitzvah, and certainly speaking between the fulfillment of two Mitzvahs under that same blessing, is forbidden, and possibly invalidates the blessing and requires a new blessing to be repeated, as will be explained in volume 2 under the laws of blessings of Mitzvahs. The reason for the difference is because once the food or beverage has been consumed after the blessing has been recited, the benefit is considered fully fulfilled, and all additional benefit is also considered to be included in that original blessing unless a proper Hesech Hadas is made, as will be explained in chapter 19 in length.]

1. The forbidden speech and cases of exception:

Sheilas Shalom for Kavod and Yirah:[24] It is forbidden for a person to speak between the blessing and eating even for the sake of greeting a person of stature [i.e. Sheilas Shalom for a person whom we permit one to greet during prayer[25]] due to respect or fear. [Thus, even if one is greeted by his father or teacher upon saying a blessing, he may not respond to them until he chews and swallows the food.]

For the sake of the food:[26] It is initially forbidden for one to speak between the blessing and eating even for the sake of the food that he is about to eat [unless it is not possible for one to eat the food until he talks], as will be explained in C. [Thus, after saying the blessing one may not ask for the salt to be passed down so one can eat the food with salt. Certainly, one may not tell people “Shah” to be quiet.]

• Example: After making the blessing of Hamotzi, Rabbi Yaakov realized there was no salt on the table. He turned to his friend, Chaim, and said, “Chaim, could you please pass the salt?” Although it’s best not to speak at this time, since Rabbi Yaakov’s words were for the sake of eating, he does not need to repeat the Hamotzi blessing.

For the sake of a time sensitive Mitzvah – General law:[27] In general, it is forbidden for one to make an interval between the blessing and the eating, even for the sake of a necessary Mitzvah. Some Poskim[28] however rule that this only applies to a Rabbinical Mitzvah, however a time sensitive Biblical Mitzvah may be performed between the blessing and the eating and is not considered an interval between the blessing and the eating. Furthermore, some Poskim[29] rule that even by a Rabbinical time sensitive Mitzvah, it is permitted for one to make an interval between the blessing and the eating and then repeat the blessing. [Practically, one is to be stringent and not make any interval between the blessing and the eating for the sake of any Mitzvah, and if he does so the blessing is to be repeated unless it pertains to the meal[30], with the exceptions of those cases to be brought below and in the footnote.]

For the sake of a Mitzvah – Amen, Kaddish, Kedusha:[31] It is  forbidden for one to answer Amen to another persons blessing, and certainly not to his own blessing, between the blessing and eating and swallowing of the food [with exception to one who is being Yotzei a blessing with another, in which case he must answer Amen to his blessing prior to eating the food[32]]. [Thus, after saying the blessing one must wait until he swallows the food to be able to answer Amen to a blessing, and may only do so if by that time it is no longer an Amen Yesoma. The same applies to answering for Kaddish and Kedusha, that one may not answer to it between the blessing and eating.[33] This is all Lechatchila, however, Bedieved if one answered Amen to his own blessing or another persons blessing, then many Poskim[34] rule that it does not invalidate the blessing, and so is the final ruling. However, if one answered Amen Yihei Shmei Raba, Barchu, or Kedusha, then the blessing is invalid and must be repeated.[35]]

For the sake of a Mitzvah – Leisheiv BaSukkah:[36] The custom is to say the blessing of Leishev Basukkah after reciting the blessing of Hamotzi or Mezonos and doing so is not considered an interval.[37]

For the sake of a Mitzvah – Yehi Ratzon by Apple in honey:[38] On the first night of Rosh Hashanah the custom is to eat a sweet apple with honey at the beginning of the meal and recite the prayer of Yehi Ratzon in approximation to its eating. This Yehi Ratzon is to be said only after the initial bite and swallowing of the apple, as it is forbidden to make an interval between the eating and the blessing. [However, some Poskim[39] rule that the Yehi Ratzon is to be recited after the blessing, prior to eating the apple. Practically, the Chabad custom is to recite it immediately after reciting the blessing of Haeitz, prior to eating the apple.[40]]

For the sake of a Mitzvah – Kiddush and Havdalah:[41] If one forgot to recite Kiddush on Shabbos or Yom Tov and remembered after saying the blessing of Hamotzi, prior to eating the food, then he is to immediately recite Kiddush on the bread, and then eat the bread. [However, by Havdalah one may not recite Havdalah between the blessing and eating if he remembered to recite Havdalah after reciting a blessing, and rather he must eat some of the food first.[42]]

Said another blessing between the blessing and eating:[43] If one recited a blessing over food or beverage, and then recited a second blessing over another food or beverage prior to eating or drinking the first food, then the second blessing acts as an interval and invalidation between the first blessing and its food, and it hence must be repeated after he consumes the food of the second blessing. Hence, whenever one has foods of two different blessings in front of him he may not recite the blessings consecutively, and must eat or drink the food after each individual blessing prior to proceeding with the next one.

1. The law Bedieved if one talked, and talking for the sake of the food:[44]

If one spoke [even one word[45]] of matters that do not pertain to the eating in between the blessing and the eating, then he must repeat the blessing.[46] This applies even to one who is being Yotzei a blessing from another, that if he spoke [even one word] between the blessing that he heard and the eating, then he must personally recite the blessing himself.[47]

Matters pertaining to the meal:[48] If, however, one spoke of matters pertaining to the food, such as one asked for the salt or spread to be brought to eat with the food, then it is not considered a Hefsek, and the blessing remains valid.[49] Furthermore, even if his statement does not pertain to the particular food which the blessing was said over, but pertains to the general meal, it is not considered an interval.[50] This, however, is only Bedieved, however initially one may not speak of any matter between the blessing and eating even if the matter pertains to the meal unless he cannot eat without speaking.[51] [If, however, it is not possible for one to eat the food until he talks, then he may talk.[52] Thus, for example, one may fulfill a Biblical vow before eating if such a vow was made. For Rabbinical vows, one should eat first and then fulfill the vow.[53] Likewise, if a blessing was said over food from which Teruma and Maaser were not removed, one may separate them afterward without invalidating the blessing.[54] Similarly, if a question arises about the food’s Kashrus status, it is permissible to resolve the matter before eating without requiring a new blessing.[55] Likewise, if one forgot to wash his hands before eating bread and remember after reciting “Hamotzi,” then he is to wash his hands with a blessing immediately, and then eat the bread without repeating the blessing.[56]]

• Example – Salt or other dip:[57] If after saying the blessing of Hamotzi one asked someone to bring him the salt, Bedieved, the blessing remains valid. This applies even to bread of today which already contains salt. The same applies if he said pass me the Liftan [i.e. Chumus or other dip], Bedieved the blessing remains valid.
• Example – Pass food to Ploni:[58] If after saying the blessing of Hamotzi one asked someone to pass food to another person, Bedieved, the blessing remains valid. [This applies whether the man is wealthy or poor.[59]]
• Example – Give the animal to eat:[60] If after saying the blessing of Hamotzi one asked someone to feed his animals, Bedieved, the blessing remains valid.[61] [However, initially, one is to feed his animals before saying the blessing and if he did not do so, that he is to delay feeding them until after he eats and swallows some of the bread.[62]]
• Example – Pass knife, meal utensils:[63] If after saying the blessing of Hamotzi one asked someone to pass him a knife to cut the food, Bedieved, the blessing remains valid.[64] The same applies regarding any meal utensil, that if one asked for it to be brought or passed down it is not considered an interval Bedieved.[65]
• Example – Hataras Nedarim, Remove Terumas Umaasros, verify Kashrus: See above in brackets!

1. Switching rooms:[66]

One may not switch rooms between the blessing, and eating and swallowing of the food.[67] [Seemingly, certainly one may not switch rooms in the midst of saying the blessing. This applies even if one intended to switch rooms when he said the blessing.[68] Even Bedieved one who switched rooms is required to repeat the blessing, if it was not done for the sake of the meal, as will be explained. Initially, one should not even walk from one corner of the room to another corner of the room, between the blessing and eating, although one may walk within his two cubits between the blessing and eating.[69] This applies even to one who is being Yotzei a blessing from another, as explained next.]

Bedieved:[70] Bedieved, if one switched rooms between the blessing and eating, then he must repeat the blessing [even if he did not speak at all in-between]. [This applies even if he took the food with him. This applies even to one who is being Yotzei a blessing from another, that if he switched rooms between the blessing that he heard and the eating, then he must personally recite the blessing himself.[71]] If, however, one switched rooms between the blessing and eating for the sake of matters pertaining to the food, such as to retrieve an item needed for the food, then it is not considered a Hefsek and the blessing remains valid.[72] This, however, is only Bedieved, however initially one may not switch rooms for any matter between the blessing and eating even if the matter pertains to the meal unless he cannot eat without switching rooms.[73] [However, if one went from inside to outside or vice versa, then it is a Hefsek even in middle of eating and certainly is considered a Hefsek between the blessing and the eating, even if it was for the sake of matters pertaining to the food.[74] However, all this applies only if one did not have intent to switch areas at the time of saying the blessing, and cannot see his original location of where the blessing was recited. If, however, one can see the original location in which the blessing was recited then he is not required to repeat the blessing even if he went from inside to outside prior to eating. Furthermore, even if he cannot see his original location, if he had in mind to switch locations between the blessing and eating, and he went from one room to another in the same house, then the blessing is not to be repeated. However if he went from inside to outside, or from one house to another, then the blessing must be repeated even if he had intent to do so.[75]]

For the purpose of beginning the eating:[76] If it is not possible for one to eat the food until he switches rooms, such as if one cannot say the blessing in the area that he is currently in due to it containing feces and the like[77], then he may say the blessing in one room and then enter a second room to eat the food, so long as both rooms are in the same house.[78] [However, if one went from inside to outside or vice versa, then it is a Hefsek even in middle of eating and certainly is considered a Hefsek between the blessing and the eating.[79]]

Switching areas between bites or between two foods or beverages: Although once one has chewed and swallowed some of the food or beverage after the blessing has been said, it is now permitted for him to speak without limit prior to eating a second serving of that food or prior to eating another food that was included in that same blessing. Nevertheless, there still remain certain restrictions regarding switching rooms and areas between bites and the eating of two foods, and at times switching areas can invalidate the previous blessing and require a new blessing to be said, as will be explained at length in chapter 20.

• Example 1: You recite a blessing over a cookie in the living room. Before eating, you remember you left your phone charging in your bedroom and walk there to get it. When you return to eat the cookie, you must repeat the blessing, because you switched rooms for a reason unrelated to the meal.
• Example 2: You say a blessing over a sandwich in the kitchen, but realize you need a napkin, which is in the dining room. You go retrieve it and return to eat immediately. In this case, since your reason for switching rooms was directly related to eating, your blessing remains valid—though it’s best to avoid such situations if possible.
• Example 3: You plan in advance to say the blessing in the hallway and then eat in the dining room. Because you had this intention from the start, you do not need to repeat the blessing when you move rooms (as long as both rooms are in the same house).
• Example 4: You recite a blessing in your kitchen, then step outside into your backyard to eat. Even if you intended this from the start, moving from inside to outside is generally considered a break and you must repeat the blessing before eating.

1. Silent intervals [gestures, humming, and other actions]:[80]

It is forbidden to make even a silent non-speaking interval between the Bracha and the eating of the food, if it exceeds the amount of time it takes to say the three[81] words of Shalom Aleichem Rebbe [which is 2-3 seconds[82]]. [Thus, one may not perform any action between the blessing and the eating that is not for the sake of the eating of the food.[83] Certainly, one may not begin eating a second food prior to eating the food that the blessing was said over.[84] One may not even make hints and gestures to people which includes not twitching one’s eye towards them, and not making a motion to them with one’s fingers, or lips.[85] Certainly, one may not converse with them in sign language or through mimicking words with one’s lips without speaking. One is likewise not to make any grunts or other noises that communicate and express something to an individual.[86] One is also not to hum a tune between the blessing and eating.[87] One may not write or text message.[88]]

Bedieved:[89] Nonetheless, Bedieved if one waited longer than this amount of time between the blessing and eating, he nevertheless does not need to repeat the blessing [even if he waited a very long time[90], and even if he performed an action in between[91], so long that she did not change rooms in between as explained in D].

Making a silent Hefsek for the sake of eating – When to cut food:[92] A silent interruption that is made between the blessing and eating for the sake of eating is even initially not considered an interval at all. Hence, it is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to recite a blessing on a Shaleim, whole fruit, and then cut it to eat a piece, even though cutting it will inevitably create an interval between the blessing and eating.[93] Nonetheless, regarding bread, on a weekday one is to begin slightly cutting the bread before the Bracha, in order to approximate the Bracha to the eating as much as possible.[94] [This cutting is only permitted on behalf of cutting oneself a piece of the food in order to eat it. However, one may not cut pieces of food for the participants prior to him eating the food. Thus, by Hamotzi on Shabbos, the Mivareich must first cut for himself a piece and eat it, prior to continuing to cut and distribute pieces to the other participants.[95]] See Halacha 10 For the full details of this subject.

Spilling water prior to the blessings:[96] One who is accustomed to drink water and spill out some of it prior to drinking it due to worry of evil waters, is to pour the water out prior to him beginning to say the blessing, and is not to wait to pour it out until afterwards.[97]

Spilling Kiddush wine before Blessing:[98] In order to preserve non-Pagum Kiddush wine for the listerners, it is permitted for one to pour some wine into another cup after one finishes the blessing of Hagafen, prior to him drinking the wine, and doing so is not considered a Hefsek.[99]

Examples of Proper Practice

• Correct: David pours water into a glass, waits for it to reach room temperature, says the blessing, and drinks right away.
• Correct: Yaakov says the blessing over an apple, then immediately cuts a slice for himself and eats it.
• Correct: Miriam sprinkles salt on her soup before the blessing. After saying the blessing, she eats the soup promptly.
• Correct: Yaakov says the blessing over bread, then immediately cuts a slice for himself and eats it before offering pieces to others at the table.

Examples of Improper Practice

• Incorrect: Rachel says the blessing on chocolate, but before eating, she begins texting a friend. This delay is considered an interruption.
• Incorrect: After reciting the blessing, Ben starts humming a tune while waiting for his drink to cool, creating a prohibited pause.
• Incorrect: Leah says the blessing over a wrapped granola bar and only then opens the wrapper. This unnecessary delay should have been avoided by unwrapping before the blessing.
• Incorrect: During the blessing, Isaac says “shh” to quiet his children. Speaking or making sounds, even as a gesture, can invalidate the blessing if done before G-d’s name.

Table of Laws Regarding Interruptions Between Blessing and Eating

5. Swallowing the food after the blessing prior to talking or switching rooms:[104]

It is forbidden to make an interval between a blessing and the eating, even while one is still chewing, until he swallows the food.[105] [This is in addition to the prohibition to talk while eating due to danger of choking.[106]] This applies even regarding speaking of matters that pertain to the meal. One likewise must beware not to switch areas while chewing, prior to swallowing.[107] [Once one has swallowed any amount of the food after the blessing, an interval may be made.[108]]

Bedieved:[109] If he spoke of matters not relating to the meal while chewing, it is questionable whether he must repeat the blessing. [Practically, Safek Brachos Lihakel, and a blessing is not to be repeated.[110] However, after swallowing the piece, one should say Shehakol over a piece of candy or bit of sugar and have in mind to exempt the swallowed food with this blessing.[111]]

Bread:[112] Some Poskim[113] rule that one [who is eating a meal[114]] is to eat a Kezayis of bread simultaneously after Hamotzi [without making an interval in-between[115]].[116] Other Poskim[117] rule this is not necessary and so is the custom.[118] [Thus, according to Admur, as soon as one swallows any amount of bread he may speak.[119] However, other Poskim[120] rule it is proper to suspect for the first opinion.]

6. Tasting – Saying a blessing when tasting a food:[128]

One who plans to swallow any amount of food, even if he merely intends to taste it to see if it needs salt or spices[129], must recite a blessing prior to eating it.[130] If however he plans to spit out the food and simply desires to taste/chew[131] it to see if it needs salt or spices[132] or to see if it tastes good[133], a blessing is not required [and is therefore forbidden to be said[134]] even if he benefits from the taste [i.e. chews it] and tastes a lot of the food, so long as he tastes less than a Revius [of a liquid and less than a Kezayis of a solid[135]].[136] [This applies even if he tastes many different foods.[137]] If, however, he tastes a Revius[138] or more [of a liquid, and a Kezayis or more of a solid[139]], then a blessing is recited even if he plans to spit out the food.[140]

• Example 1: You are cooking soup and want to check if it needs more salt. You take a spoonful, taste it, and swallow. You must recite a blessing before tasting, even though your intention is just to test the flavor.
• Example 2: You are preparing a sauce for a meal and want to taste it, but you plan to spit it out after tasting. The amount you taste is less than a Kezayis (for solids) or less than a Revius (for liquids). No blessing is required in this case.
• Example 3: At a food tasting event, you sample several foods but spit out each one, never swallowing a full Kezayis or Revius of any item. No blessing is required in this scenario.

7. Swallowing – Saying a blessing when swallowing a food without chewing:

One who swallows a food without chewing it, is nevertheless required to say a blessing beforehand if his [cheek or] throat will feel the taste of the food and benefit from it.[145] If however, no taste will be felt, then a blessing is not recited even if the food will benefit his stomach.[146]

• Example 1: Swallowing a small pill-sized morsel of bread without chewing—if the bread’s flavor is sensed in the mouth or throat, a blessing is needed; if not, no blessing is recited.
• Example 2: Swallowing a flavorless object for health reasons (such as a plain gelatin capsule)—since no taste is experienced, a blessing is not recited.

8. Blessing on inedible, forbidden foods, forced feeding:
9. Medicinal foods, Medicine, Vitamins – Is a blessing to be recited?[147]

Chewable and good taste: All [medicines, vitamins, and] foods or drinks which are consumed for medicinal [or health] purposes, if they contain a sweet taste [and are chewed[148]] and ones mouth thus benefits from them, then one is to say a blessing prior to eating them. One is likewise to recite a blessing after eating them if one ate enough for an after blessing.[149] This applies even if the person has no appetite to eat the food and is being forced to do so due to his illness.

Swallowable pills and foods, or bad tasting chewable medicinal foods and pills: If the food or, medicine, or vitamin contains a bitter taste [or are sweet but they are swallowed and not chewed] and one hence does not receive pleasure from eating it even though he benefits from getting healed through it, then no blessing is said neither prior to eating it or after.

Tasteless or benign taste:[150] If the medicinal foods do not have a good taste, but likewise do not have a completely bad taste, then according to some Poskim one is to say a blessing of Shehakol over them.

• Chewable Vitamin Gummies: Sarah takes a daily vitamin gummy that is sweet and enjoyable to eat. Before consuming it, she recites a blessing, as she benefits from its good taste.
• Bitter Cough Syrup: David needs to take a bitter-tasting cough syrup. Since the syrup is unpleasant and he does not derive pleasure from the taste, he does not recite a blessing before or after taking it.
• Tasteless Supplement Capsule: Rachel swallows a tasteless supplement capsule whole, without chewing it. Since there is no taste and she simply swallows it, no blessing is required.
• Flavored Electrolyte Drink: Michael drinks a sweet, flavored electrolyte solution for hydration during illness. Given its pleasant taste, he recites a blessing before drinking.
• Swallowing a Pill with Water: When Leah swallows a pill with plain water used solely to help her swallow, no blessing is recited on the water. However, if she uses apple juice instead and enjoys its taste, she recites a blessing on the juice.

1. Is a blessing said on the liquid used to help swallow a pill?[151]

Plain water: No blessing is said.

Flavored water, soda; fruit juice, etc: A blessing is said

Seltzer: If one drinks a small amount to merely swallow the pill then no blessing is said.

1. Blessing over Non-Kosher food:[152]

A blessing is not to be recited upon eating non Kosher foods or any food that is forbidden in consumption, whether Biblically or Rabbinically. [Practically, this applies even if the food was eaten Beshogeg, nevertheless an after blessing is not to be recited.[153] However, some Poskim[154] rule that a before and after blessing may be recited upon eating Chalav Akum and Bishul Akum, as these are light Rabbinical prohibitions.]

Case of Sakana:[155] One who eats a forbidden food in a case of danger is required to say a before and after blessing over the food as he in truth is eating permitted [food], as he is doing a Mitzvah to save his life, and since he benefits from the food he must therefore say a blessing.

• Example: If someone ate a meat sandwich and then r”l discovered that the meat was nonkosher, they should not say an after blessing over it.
• Example: If a person with a life-threatening allergy must eat non-Kosher food in a hospital to survive, they should say the appropriate blessing.

1. Machalei Sakana – Blessing on foods forbidden due to danger:[156]

A blessing is not to be recited over foods which are forbidden to be eaten due to danger. This applies whether the food was prohibited by the Sages due to danger [i.e. fish and meat mixture], or is personally forbidden to the person [i.e. lethally allergic to dairy]. However, if the food is simply generally not healthy or recommended [i.e. high in sugar or salt] then a blessing is to be recited upon eating or drinking the food. 

• Example: Someone who is allergic to peanuts should not say a blessing if they eat them (which is forbidden for them).
• Example: Eating a dish that combines fish and meat—considered dangerous by tradition—should not be preceded by a blessing.
• Example: Eating potato chips or sugary candy—one should recite a blessing before eating.

1. Blessing on food on Yom Kippur:[157]

One who is required to eat on Yom Kippur due to medical reasons [or if he is a child below Bar/Bas Mitzvah] is required to say a blessing before eating the food and is to also say an after blessing after eating the foods [if he ate a Kezayis within four minutes, and has the physical and mental capability of doing so[158]].[159] [One who is eating according to Shiurim of less than 30cc and less than 30 grams every nine minutes, is not to say an after blessing at all.]

• Example: Suppose an adult is ill on Yom Kippur and, under medical advice, eats a meal exceeding the minimum required amount. They would recite the standard blessing before eating and, if they have eaten enough, the appropriate after blessing as well. In contrast, if another person, wishing to minimize their intake, only eats less than 30cc every nine minutes, they would say the blessing before eating, but would not recite an after blessing.

1. Stolen foods:[160]

The robber: It is forbidden for one to eat a stolen food. It goes without saying that it is forbidden for him to recite a blessing over it, whether a before blessing or an after blessing. This however only applies so long as the food has not changed ownership from the owner to the robber, however if ownership has changed and the food is now considered owned by the robber who is eating it, then although it is still forbidden for him to recite a before blessing[161], nonetheless an after blessing is required to be recited.[162] This applies whether the owner has given up hope of retrieving the food, or the food has gone through a change.[163]

Another person:[164] If the stolen food was given or sold to another person, it remains forbidden for him to eat the food or recite a blessing over it, so long as it remains in the ownership of the original owner from whom the food was stolen. However, if ownership of the food has changed and the food is now considered owned by the person eating it who is not the original robber, then both a before and after blessing is required to be recited.

How does the food change ownership: Food can change ownership from the original owner from whom it was stolen, to the possession of the robber, or other individual to whom the robber sold or gave it to, through one of two ways: 1) The owner giving up hope of retrieving the food. 2) The food went through a change. If after discovering that his food was stolen the owner gives up hope of ever retrieving the food, then the food changes ownership and enters the possession of whoever now has the food, whether the original robber or a second individual. Likewise, if the food went through a physical change, such as it was ground or cooked or baked, then it changes ownership from him and enters the possession of whoever now has the food, whether the original robber or a second individual.[165] Despite this, the robber himself may never say a before blessing upon eating the stolen food, even if ownership has changed and has now entered his possession, being that he is obligated to return it, or being that it came into his possession through sin. However, once the food is eaten by him, since the food can no longer be returned he is therefore obligated to say an after blessing.

• Example: If Alex steals an apple and eats it while the original owner still hopes to get it back, Alex cannot say any blessing. If the owner gives up hope or the apple is baked into a pie, and Alex eats it, Alex must say the after blessing but not the before blessing. If Yosef, who is not the thief, eats the pie after ownership has changed, Yosef must say both the before and after blessings.

1. Blessing on force-feeding:[166]

If a person is physically forced, such as by robbers, to eat a food or drink a beverage which he is repulsed by and receives no pleasure from, then a blessing is not to be recited.[167] If, however, he does receive pleasure from it [such as its taste is enjoyable] but he does not desire to eat it at all at this time and is simply being forced to do so, then it is debated amongst the Poskim[168] whether a before or after blessing is to be recited. Practically, due to the rule of Safek Brachos Lihakel, we rule that a blessing is not to be recited.[169] This however only applies when one is literally being force-fed. However if one is willingly eating the food, such as for medicinal reasons, then even if he would not have wanted to eat it at this time if not for the medicinal reason nonetheless, if it is a pleasurable taste [i.e. not bitter] than a blessing must be recited according to all opinions, as explained in Halacha A.

• Example 1: If someone is physically forced—like by robbers—to eat a food they find unpleasant and receives no enjoyment at all, no blessing is recited.
• Example 2: If a person is eating something for medicinal reasons, and the taste is at least somewhat enjoyable, even if they would not otherwise want to eat at that moment, a blessing is recited according to all opinions.

1. Blessing when eating after being satiated:[170]

If a person forces himself to eat or drink a food despite himself being satiated to the point that he despises and repulses any further eating, then he does not recite a blessing either before or after as this is not considered eating at all.

• For example, if Sarah finishes a big meal and, despite feeling stuffed, decides to eat a piece of cake just to please her friend, she would not say a blessing over the cake.

1. The blessing on spoiled foods:[171]

Partially spoiled but still edible: All foods that have begun to spoil slightly, but still remain edible in a time of need, lose their unique blessing [such as Hamotzi, Haeitz, Ha’adama] and receive the blessing of Shehakol. This applies even to bread which began to spoil, that it receives the blessing of Shehakol.

Completely spoiled: If the food has completely spoiled to the point that it is completely inedible even in a time of need, then no blessing is recited upon eating it. [Furthermore, it is forbidden to eat such foods due to Baal Teshaktzu.[172]]

Spoiled wine: Wine that has spoiled to the point that it tastes similar to vinegar to the point that most people would avoid drinking it as wine, receives the blessing of Shehakol. If however the wine has spoiled to the point that it became complete vinegar, then if the vinegar is so potent to the point that if one were to spill it on the ground it would bubble, no blessing is recited upon drinking it, as drinking it is damaging for ones health.

• Example: Bread that has started to go stale or moldy but can still be eaten receives the blessing of Shehakol.
• Example: A piece of fruit that is rotten to the core and cannot be eaten at all requires no blessing and should not be eaten.
• Example: Wine that’s just turned a little sour but is still drinkable gets Shehakol; full-strength vinegar from wine that’s now undrinkable receives no blessing.

1. Should a blessing be recited over food or drinks that one finds repulsive?[173]

Seemingly, a blessing should not be recited over such foods, as it is no different than force-feeding by which we do not recite a blessing, as explained in Halacha G.

• Example: Yosef’s mother insists he try Brussels sprouts. He eats a bite, grimacing the whole time and not enjoying it. Since he doesn’t eat out of desire or pleasure, he does not recite a blessing before or after.
• Sarah is at a family dinner and is pressured by relatives to taste a traditional dish she finds extremely unpleasant. To avoid offending anyone, she reluctantly takes a small bite, clearly not enjoying the experience and wishing it were over. Since she eats without any pleasure or desire, and only out of obligation, she does not recite a blessing before or after eating.

9. The requirement for the food to be in front of the person when saying a blessing:[174]

In order for a blessing to be valid, the food item must be present in front of the person at the time that he recites the blessing. If one said a blessing over a food or beverage without it being present before him[175] and after he finished[176] the blessing the food or drink was brought in front of him, then the blessing is invalid and he must repeat the blessing. This applies even if one had in mind to have the food brought to him after reciting the blessing.[177] [It is due to this requirement that there is an entire discussion in the Poskim regarding what one is to do if he lost the food after saying the blessing and a new food was brought in front of him, as will be explained in Halacha 22. Likewise, it is due to this requirement that there is a discussion regarding when a second food counts with the blessing of the first food if the second food was not in front of the person at the time that the blessing was recited, as explained in length in Halacha 21.] All this is Bedieved, however, initially, not only must the food be in front of the person, but he must furthermore hold it in his hand while the blessing is being recited, as will be explained next.

• Example: One who is in a rush and recited the blessing of Shehakol on a food or drink prior to opening the fridge and taking it, must repeat the blessing upon opening the fridge and taking the food. [However, some Poskim[178] rule that this only applies if he was not certain that the food was there, however if he is certain of the foods presence inside the fridge, then he does not need to repeat the blessing. Practically, according to Admur, one is to repeat the blessing.]

10. The requirement to hold the food in one’s hand when saying a blessing:[179]

In addition to the previous requirement for the food to be in front of the person at the time that the blessing is recited, of which lack thereof can invalidate the blessing and require its repetition as explained in the previous Halacha, there is also an initial requirement for one to hold onto the food at the time of the blessing. See also Chapter 2 Halacha 13!

1. The obligation to hold the food in one’s hand upon saying a blessing:[180]

One is not to say the blessing over a food or drink or spices until the food or drink or spices is in one’s hands.[181]

If said the blessing prior to the food or drink being in his hand:[182] If one said the blessing and only afterwards took the food or drink in his hands, he is not required to repeat the blessing, so long as the food or drink was in front of him at the time of the blessing. If, however, he said the blessing and only afterwards the food or drink was brought in front of him then he must repeat the blessing, as explained in the previous Halacha. [This applies even if one had in mind to have the bread brought to him after reciting the blessing.[183]]

• Example: If someone recites a blessing with bread in front of them but only picks it up afterwards, the blessing is still valid.

1. Which hand:[184]

The food or spice is to be held in one’s right hand.[185]

1. Holding with a vessel:

Holding with knife, fork, spoon:[191] Upon saying the blessing over a food one is not to hold onto the food with a knife. One may however hold onto it with another vessel, such as a fork or spoon, as this vessel is considered like one’s hand.

Gloves:[192] One is not to recite a blessing over a food or spice with gloves, and is hence to remove his gloves prior to saying a blessing. 

• Example: If a person says a blessing while holding an apple with a fork, it is acceptable, but holding it with a knife or with gloves is not proper.

11. Shaleim & Large pieces – Saying a Bracha on a whole or large food and When to cut a piece off from the food, before or after the blessing?[193]

* This Halacha covers the general directive to always say a blessing on a Shaleim, which consequently directs one to always say the blessing on a product prior to cutting it. With regards to the laws of precedence when two different foods are present, and one of them is a Shaleim – See Chapter 18 Halacha 1D.

Whole fruit or vegetable:[194] It is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to recite the blessing of Haeitz or Ha’adama on a whole [i.e. Shaleim] fruit or vegetable. This applies even if one will need to delay the eating of the fruit or vegetable in order to first cut a piece off, as a silent interruption that is made between the blessing and eating for the sake of eating is not considered an interval at all. Hence, when eating a whole fruit one is to first recite the blessing and only afterwards cut it to eat a piece in order to recite a blessing on a Shaleim, even though cutting it will inevitably create an interval between the blessing and eating.[195] [Accordingly, even when eating a watermelon, one is to first say the blessing and then cut a piece off. However, some write that by very large fruits such as watermelons, and coconut, pineapple, one is to first peel it and cut a piece off prior to saying the blessing.[196]] One is to recite the entire blessing from beginning to end and only then begin to cut the fruit or vegetable.[197]

A fruit or vegetable that needs to be checked for worms or edibility:[198] All the above only refers to a fruit or vegetable that does not need to be cut open prior to eating in order to check it for worms or to check its state of edibility. If, however, it does need to be opened and checked for worms prior to eating, or if it needs to be opened to check to see if it is edible, then this should be done prior to saying the blessing. Thus, for example one who eats a nut, should first break open the nut to check it for worms and to make sure that it did not rot, in order so one does not recite a blessing in vain.

Loaf of Bread:[199] It is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to recite the blessing of Hamotzi on a whole [i.e. Shaleim] loaf of bread. One is to recite the entire blessing from beginning to end and only then begin cutting a slice off the loaf. Nonetheless, on a weekday one is to begin slightly cutting the bread before the Bracha, in order to approximate the Bracha to the eating as much as possible. However, one must cut it in a way that it remains a Shaleim [whole], which means that he cuts only a minority of the area to the point that if one were to hold onto the cut area the bread would not fall apart. However, on Shabbos and holidays, one is not to cut the bread at all as the knife may slip and he may end up cutting the loaf in a way that ruins its wholeness.

Large slice of bread, or other food, versus small:[200] Even regarding a large slice of bread or partial loaf, one is to first recite the blessing and then cut a piece off the slice, as it is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to recite a blessing over a large piece. [The same applies regarding any food, that one should say a blessing over a large piece versus a smaller one.[201] This applies even to beverages, that one should say a blessing over a larger quantity of liquid than a smaller quantity of liquid. Hence, it is proper to say blessing on soup while the spoon is inside the bowl, and not after lifting the spoon from the bowl in which the amount of liquid is small.[202]]

12. Saying a blessing with food, or other item, in one’s mouth:[210]

See chapter 2 Halacha 7 for the full details of this matter!

It is forbidden to say a blessing while food, or any item, is in one’s mouth and it must hence be removed, as explained in Chapter 2 Halacha 7. Nonetheless, Bedieved one fulfills the blessing if he did not do so.

Began eating a food and then remembered that did not say a blessing: See Halacha 13.

13. Forgot to say Bracha – Began chewing or drinking:[211]

What is one to do if he began chewing on a food, or drinking a liquid, and then remembered that he did not say a blessing? [This law deals with the specific case that one remembered to say the blessing as he was chewing on the food or after he already placed the liquid into his mouth prior to swallowing. In Halacha 14 we will deal with the scenario that one already chewed and swallowed the food without saying a blessing and if there’s anything that can be done retroactively.]

Foods:[212] It is forbidden to say a blessing while eating food.[213] Accordingly, one who forgot and entered food into his mouth without saying a blessing [and remembered in the midst of chewing the food], then he must spit it out and say the blessing, if it is a type of food which will not become repulsive to the person after it is spat out [and he will thus return and eat it]. If, however, the food will become repulsive after it is spat out [and will thus no longer be eaten due to its repulsiveness], then one is not required to spit it out and is rather to place the food into one of the sides of his mouth and say the blessing.[214] [Thus, for example, if he began eating gum or a candy[215] without a blessing, he is to spit it out and then say the blessing. If, however he began chewing bread, or a grape[216] and then remembered that he forgot to say a blessing, he is to move it to the side of his mouth and say the blessing. In all cases, if he did not yet begin chewing the food, then he is to remove it and then say the blessing. In the event that one entered so much food into his mouth that he cannot move it to the side and say a blessing, then its law follows the same law as liquids, as explained next.]

Liquids:[217] One who forgot and entered a drink into his mouth without saying a blessing [and then remembered prior to swallowing it] some Poskim[218] rule he is to swallow the liquid [and is not required to spit it out].[219] Amongst these Poskim, some rule that he is not to say the before blessing at all over the liquid, even after swallowing.[220] Other Poskim[221], however, rule that after he swallows the liquid he is to say a blessing.[222] Practically, the Poskim[223] conclude that in order to avoid the disputes, if one has more liquid available, he is to spit it out and say a blessing on the new liquid.[224] [If he does not have more liquid available, then if he needs the drink and does not want to spit it out, he is to think the blessing in his mind, swallow it and not recite a before blessing.[225]] [Other Poskim[226], however, suggest that in all cases one is to think the blessing in his mind and then swallow the liquid.[227] Practically, one is to follow the former conclusion.[228]] In all cases, even if a before blessing was not said[229], an after blessing is to be recited [if one drank a Revius].[230]

• Example 1 – Chewing Bread: You pick up a slice of bread and start chewing it, only to realize you haven’t recited the blessing. If spitting out the chewed bread would make it unappetizing (for example, if it’s already soggy), you should move the bread to the side of your mouth and say the blessing before swallowing.
• Example 2 – Eating a Hard Candy: You place a hard candy into your mouth and remember you haven’t said a blessing. Since the candy will not become repulsive if spat out, you should remove it from your mouth, say the blessing, and then enjoy it.
• Example 3 – Drinking Water—More Available: You take a sip of water before realizing you forgot the blessing. If you have more water available, spit out what’s in your mouth, say the blessing, and then drink fresh water.
• Example 4 – Drinking Water—No More Available: You take a sip of water and realize you forgot the blessing, but this is your last bit of water. In this case, you should think the blessing in your mind, swallow the water, and not recite the blessing aloud.
• Example 5 – Eating Gum: You put gum in your mouth and start chewing, then remember you haven’t made a blessing. Gum can be spat out without becoming repulsive, so do so, say the blessing, and then start again.

14. Forgot to say Bracha – Finished eating or swallowing:[231]

What to do if one forgot and ate a food without reciting a blessing, and he has already chewed and swallowed the food?

If one forgot to say a blessing prior to eating the food and has already swallowed the food, then since it is disputed amongst the Poskim as to whether a blessing should still be said, therefore, it is proper for him to further eat some of that food and then recite a blessing over it. [Certainly he must recite a blessing if he anyways planned to continue eating the food, such as if he began eating an apple without a blessing, then he must say the blessing prior to taking another bite. The novelty of the above ruling states furthermore, that even if he already finished eating the apple and only then remembered that he did not recite the blessing, then he should eat another apple for the sake of saying the blessing, and have it include the apple that he ate without a blessing according to those Poskim who say the blessing works retroactively.]

retroactively.

• Example: Someone starts eating an apple and, after finishing it, realizes they forgot the blessing. They should take another apple (or more of the same food), recite the blessing, and then eat it. This allows the blessing to cover both the new and previously eaten apple, according to some opinions.

15. One who is unsure if he said a Bracha over a food:[232]

If one is unsure as to whether he recited a blessing on the food, then it may not be repeated.[233] [However, if one has a Shehakol food available then he should say Shehakol over it and have in mind to exempt the food with this blessing.[234]]

• Example: Suppose Yosef is about to eat an apple and cannot remember if he already said the “Borei Pri Ha’etz” blessing. Rather than repeating the blessing and risking saying it in vain, Yosef notices a piece of candy nearby, which requires the “Shehakol” blessing. Yosef says “Baruch Atah… Shehakol Nihiyah Bidvaro” over the candy, eats a bit of it, and has in mind for the blessing to also cover the apple. Yosef can now eat the apple without worry.

16. Saying the correct blessing – Research and study:

The sages established six different blessings for six different groups of foods.

1. The blessing of Hamotzi is to be recited over bread as will be explained in length in chapter 8.
2. The blessing of Mezonos is to be recited over five grain products, as will be explained in length in chapter 10.
3. The blessing of Hagafen is to be recited over beverages that derive from grapes, as will be explained in length in chapter 15.
4. The blessing of Haeitz is to be recited over fruits of the tree, as will be explained in length in chapter 12.
5. The blessing of Ha’adama is to be recited over vegetables and fruits of the ground, as will be explained in length in chapter 12.
6. The blessing of Shehakol is to be recited over all other food products, as will be explained in length in chapter 13.

Requirement to say correct blessing:[235] One is required to recite the correct blessing that has been designated for each and every food. If one is not knowledgeable in the laws of blessings and as to what blessing should be said over which product, then he is required to visit a Sage to study the laws of blessings [or purchase a Sefer or go online and research the correct blessings].

Saying Shehakol instead of correct blessing:[236] Accordingly, even though the blessing of Shehakol covers all foods as will be explained in Halacha 17, this is only Bedieved, however initially it is forbidden for one to fulfill his obligation with the blessing of Shehakol and rather one must research and study what blessing is to be said for the corresponding food.

17. One who is unsure as to the correct blessing:[237]

Doubt if is Shehakol: If even after one’s study and research he is still left in doubt in regards to which blessing is to be recited over the product, either due to a Halachic question or dispute[238], or due to not knowing at all what the food item is [and cannot tell if it is a fruit, or vegetable, or a Shehakol product], then one is to recite the blessing of Shehakol, being that it covers all products. [Alternatively, one is to eat the product within a meal of bread, if it is a food that can be exempt with Hamotzi. This indeed is the better option, as in such a case there’s no doubt at all regarding the blessing.[239]]

Doubt if is Haeitz or Ha’adama:[240] In the event that one is in doubt [after study and research as stated above] as to whether a certain agricultural product is a fruit of the ground or a fruit of a tree, or in the case that there is a Halachic doubt as to the correct blessing due to a dispute amongst the Poskim[241], then one is to say the blessing of Ha’adama, as Ha’adama includes Haeitz. [If, however, one said Haeitz in such a case, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation as Safek Brachos Lihakel.[242]] [Alternatively, one is to eat the product within a meal of bread, if it is a food that can be exempt with Hamotzi. This indeed is the better option, as in such a case there’s no doubt at all regarding the blessing.[243]]

Doubt if is Mezonos or Ha’adama:[244] In the event that one is in doubt [after study and research as stated above] as to whether a certain food is Mezonos or Ha’adama, then one is to say the blessing of Shehakol.

Doubt if is Hamotzi or Mezonos:[245] In the event that one is in doubt [after study and research as stated above]  as to whether a certain food is Hamotzi or Mezonos, then one is to say the blessing of Mezonos.[246]

Eating bread when in doubt:[247] Whenever one is in doubt as to the proper blessing of a food, it is always recommended to eat the food within a meal of bread, being that the blessing over the bread will cover that food, and circumvent the question.

Eating two other foods of the questionable blessings:[248] See chapter 21 Halacha 16 regarding after blessings! Whenever there is doubt as to which before or after blessing is to be recited over a food, one  should try to recite a blessing on two other food that receive one of the two questionable blessings, and hence have the questionable food definitively covered by the correct blessed.

• Example 1: You find a snack and can’t determine what it’s made of—even after checking ingredients. Recite Shehakol.
• Example 2: You’re unsure if a berry is considered a fruit of the tree (Ha’etz) or ground (Ha’adama). Say Ha’adama.
• Example 3: You have a food that might be a grain product (Mezonos) or a vegetable product (Ha’adama) but can’t tell. Say Shehakol.
• Example 4: You’re unsure if a pastry is bread (Hamotzi) or cake (Mezonos). Recite Mezonos.

18. Said wrong Bracha Rishona – Law of Bedieved:[249]

See the Table at the end of this Halacha for a summary of all scenarios and their corresponding ruling.

1. Hamotzi – Said Hamotzi instead of correct blessing:

Correct blessing is Mezonos – Pas Haba Bekisnin:[250] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Hamotzi on a baked Mezonos food which is defined as Pas Haba Bekisnin, then one fulfills his obligation and the blessing of Mezonos is not to be recited.[251] This applies even if one did not set a meal over the Pas Haba Bekisnin food. Upon finishing eating, one recites the regular after blessing of Al Hamichyeh and not Birchas Hamazon, unless he ate enough to require Birchas Hamazon.

• Example: Yosef prepares a snack of crackers, which are classified as Pas Haba Bekisnin and require the blessing of Mezonos. Distracted, Yosef recites the blessing of Hamotzi instead. According to the law of Bedieved, since Hamotzi was said on a Mezonos food, Alex fulfills their obligation and does not need to recite Mezonos again. After finishing the crackers, Alex recites the after-blessing of Al Hamichya and not Birkat Hamazon, unless a large enough quantity was eaten.

Correct blessing is Mezonos – Tavshil of Hei Minei Dagan:[252] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Hamotzi on a Mezonos food which can never become Hamotzi [i.e. cooked pasta, deep fried Sufganiyot donuts, cholent with grains, oatmeal porridge, etc], then one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Mezonos on the food.[253] [Hence, one is to immediately say Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed and then recite the correct blessing on the food. If one corrected himself within Kdei Dibbur then he is Yotzei, as explained in Halacha 19.]

Correct blessing is Hagafen, Haeitz, Ha’adma, Shehakol:[254] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Hamotzi on Hagafen wine or grape juice, or on a Haeitz fruit or Ha’adma vegetable, or on a Shehakol product, then one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Hagafen, or Haeitz, or Ha’adama, or Shehakol.[255] This applies even to legume bread which is Shehakol or Mezonos [i.e. rice], nevertheless, one does not fulfill his obligation and he must repeat the correct blessing.[256] [Hence, one is to immediately say Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed and then recite the correct blessing on the food. If one corrected himself within Kdei Dibbur then he is Yotzei as explained in Halacha 19.]

Correct blessing is not Hamotzi due to Safek: In any case that there is a dispute or doubt as to whether the correct blessing of a product is Hamotzi versus a different blessing, and the final ruling is to say the different blessing, then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Hamotzi he nonetheless fulfills his obligation. See Halacha B.

1. Mezonos – Said Mezonos instead of correct blessing:

Correct blessing is Hamotzi:[257] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Mezonos on Hamotzi bread then some Poskim[258] rule that he fulfills his obligation.[259] However, other Poskim[260] argue that one does not fulfill his obligation.[261] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakeil [and hence the blessing of Hamotzi is not to be repeated].[262] [Nonetheless, one who desires to escape the dispute is to say Shehakol on another food, such as sugar, and have in mind to include the Hamotzi bread, just in case that it was not exempted with the Mezonos blessing.[263] Likewise, if one remembers his mistake within Kdei Dibbur, then one is to initially correct himself and conclude with the words Hamotzi Lechem Min Ha’aretz.[264]]

Correct blessing is Hagafen, Haeitz, Ha’adama, Shehakol:[265] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Mezonos on Hagafen wine or grape juice, or on a Haeitz fruit or Ha’adama vegetable, or on a Shehakol product, then according to the simple understanding of the Poskim[266], one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Hagafen, or Haeitz, or Ha’adama, or Shehakol, and so is the explicit ruling of a number of Poskim.[267] This applies even to legume bread or crackers which is Shehakol [i.e. buckwheat crackers or bread], nevertheless, one does not fulfill his obligation and he must repeat the correct blessing.[268] This applies even to wine.[269] However, some Poskim[270] rule that by wine and dates, one fulfills his obligation Bedieved if he said the blessing of Mezonos. Furthermore, there are Poskim[271] who are of the opinion that the blessing of Mezonos Bedieved covers all food and satiating beverages [i.e. wine, juice, milk] similar to the blessing of Shehakol, with the exception to water and salt [and all water-based beverages[272]], by which one does not fulfill his obligation with the blessing of Mezonos.[273] [Some Poskim[274] conclude based on this that in the event that one accidentally recited a blessing of Mezonos he should eat a small amount, and then go outside or inside to make a Hefsek, and then say the correct blessing prior to continuing eating. Practically, however, according to Admur, the main position follows not to suspect for the above opinion and hence one is to immediately say Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed and then recite the correct blessing on the food.[275] However, many suspect for the lenient opinion as Safek Brachos Lihakel. If one corrected himself within Kdei Dibbur then he is Yotzei as explained in Halacha 19.]

Correct blessing is not Mezonos due to Safek: In any case that there is a dispute or doubt as to whether the correct blessing of a product is Mezonos versus a different blessing, and the final ruling is to say the different blessing, then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Mezonos he nonetheless fulfills his obligation. See Halacha B.

Said Mezonos on Mezonos food and intended also on bread or other foods: See Halacha 20.

1. Said Hagafen instead of correct blessing:

Correct blessing is Hamotzi, Mezonos, Haeitz, Ha’adama, Shehakol: If one accidentally recited the blessing of Borei Peri Hagafen on a Hamotzi, Mezonos, Haeitz, Ha’adama, or Shehakol product, then one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing on that food. This is with exception grapes as explained next.

Grapes and raisins:[278] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Hagafen on grapes or raisins then one fulfills his obligation.

1. Haeitz – Said Haeitz instead of correct blessing:

Correct blessing is Hamotzi or Mezonos:[279] Some Poskim[280] rule that if one recited Haeitz over Hamotzi bread [or a Mezonos food, made of wheat[281]] then he fulfills his obligation.[282] Many Poskim[283], however, argue and rule that one does not fulfill his obligation. [Practically, the main opinion follows that one is not Yotzei and hence one is to immediately say Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed and then recite the correct blessing on the food.]

Correct blessing is Hagafen:[284] Some Poskim[285] rule that if one recited the blessing of Haeitz on wine instead of the blessing of Hagafen, then he does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Hagafen. Other Poskim[286], however, rule that one does fulfill his obligation Bedieved if he said the blessing of Haeitz over wine. [Practically, Safek Brachos Lihakel and the blessing is not to be repeated.[287] However, if one remembers his mistake within Kdei Dibbur, then one is to initially correct himself and conclude with the words Borei Peri Hagafen.[288] Likewise, some Poskim[289] write that he should only drink a small amount of wine, and then go outside or inside to make a Hefsek, and then say the correct blessing prior to continuing eating.] 

Correct blessing is Ha’adma:[290] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Haeitz on a Ha’adama fruit or vegetable, then he does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Ha’adama. [Hence, one is to immediately say Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed and then recite the correct blessing on the food.]

Correct blessing is Shehakol:[291] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Haeitz on a Shehakol product, then one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Shehakol.

Correct blessing is not Haeitz due to Safek or due to degradation, or due to Minhag: In any case that there is a dispute or doubt as to whether the correct blessing of a product is Haeitz versus a different blessing [i.e. bananas, coffee[292], sugar from sugar cane[293]], and the final ruling is to say the different blessing, then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Haeitz he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.[294] Likewise, in any case in which the original blessing of the product is Haeitz, and it is lowered to a different blessing due to degradation [i.e. not yet ripe enough[295], not yet cooked or was cooked and degraded, was turned into puree or certain juices[296], is not main part of fruit[297]] then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Haeitz he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.[298] It goes without saying, that in any case in which the ideal blessing is Haeitz and one simply says a different blessing due to custom and tradition, then if one recited the blessing of Haeitz he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.

1. Ha’adama – Said Ha’adama instead of correct blessing

Correct blessing is Hamotzi or Mezonos:[299] Some Poskim[300] rule that one who recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a Mezonos or Hamotzi food does not fulfill his obligation, and he is therefore required to repeat the blessing of Mezonos/Hamotzi on the food. Other Poskim[301], however, rule that he does fulfill his obligation. [This applies whether to a baked or to a cooked Mezonos product.[302]] Practically, we rule that Safek Brachos L’hakel and hence he is not to repeat the blessing [whether by Hamotzi, or by a baked or to a cooked Mezonos product[303]].[304] [Nonetheless, one who desires to escape the dispute is to say Shehakol on another food, such as sugar, and have in mind to include the Mezonos/Hamotzi food, just in case that it was not exempted with the Ha’adama blessing.[305] Alternatively, he can be Yotzei the blessing with another person who is now beginning to eat bread or Mezonos. Likewise, if one remembers his mistake within Kdei Dibbur, then one is to initially correct himself and conclude with the words Hamotzi Lechem Min Ha’aretz.[306]]

Correct blessing is Hagafen:[307] Some Poskim[308] rule that if one recited the blessing of Ha’adama on wine instead of the blessing of Hagafen, then he does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Hagafen. Other Poskim[309], however, rule that one does fulfill his obligation Bedieved if he said the blessing of Ha’adama over wine. [Practically, Safek Brachos Lihakel and the blessing is not to be repeated.[310] However, if one remembers his mistake within Kdei Dibbur, then one is to initially correct himself and conclude with the words Borei Peri Hagafen.[311] Likewise, some Poskim[312] write that he should only drink a small amount of wine, and then go outside or inside to make a Hefsek, and then say the correct blessing prior to continuing eating.]

Correct blessing is Haeitz:[313] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a Haeitz fruit, then Bedieved he fulfills his obligation. [However, even in such a case, one should initially correct himself within Kdei Dibbur and recite the correct wording of Haeitz if he remembers within enough time. See Halacha 19.] Accordingly, in the event that one is in doubt as to whether a certain agricultural product is a fruit of the ground or a fruit of a tree, or in the case that there is a is a Halachic doubt as to the correct blessing due to a dispute amongst the Poskim[314], then one is to say the blessing of Ha’adama, as Ha’adama includes Haeitz.[315] [If, however, one said Haeitz in such a case, he nevertheless fulfills his obligation as Safek Brachos Lihakel.[316]]

Correct blessing is Shehakol:[317] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a Shehakol product, then one does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing of Shehakol.

Correct blessing is not Ha’adama due to Safek or due to degradation, or due to Minhag: In any case that there is a dispute or doubt as to whether the correct blessing of a product is Ha’adama versus a different blessing, and the final ruling is to say the different blessing, then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Ha’adama he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.[318] Likewise, in any case in which the original blessing of the product is Ha’adama, and it is lowered to a different blessing due to degradation [i.e. not yet ripe enough[319], not yet cooked or was cooked and degraded, was turned into puree or certain juices[320], is not main part of vegetable[321]] then Bedieved if one recited the blessing of Ha’adma he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.[322] It goes without saying that in any case in which the ideal blessing is Ha’adama and one simply says a different blessing due to custom and tradition, then if one recited the blessing of Ha’adama he nonetheless fulfills his obligation.

Correct blessing is Ha’adama but had in mind also an Haeitz fruit or was on table: See Halacha 20!

1. Shehakol – Said Shehakol instead of correct blessing:[325]

If one recited the blessing of Shehakol on a food of a different blessing of any kind, he fulfills his obligation and is not to repeat the blessing. This applies whether the food is bread which is Hamotzi, or to a Mezonos food, or to a Hagafen beverage, or to a Haeitz fruit, or to a Ha’adma vegetable. In all the above cases the blessing of Shehakol fulfills the obligation of the food and a new blessing is not to be recited.

Lechatchila:[326] The above law is only Bedieved, however initially it is forbidden for one to fulfill his obligation with the blessing of Shehakol and rather one must research and study what blessing is to be said for the corresponding food and if one is not knowledgeable in the laws of blessings then he is required to study the laws with a Rabbi as explained in Halacha 17.

Case of doubt:[327] If even after one’s study and research he is still left in doubt in regards to which blessing is to be recited over the product, either due to a Halachic question or dispute[328], or due to not knowing at all what the food item is [and cannot tell if it is a fruit, or vegetable, or a Shehakol product], then one is to recite the blessing of Shehakol, being that it covers all products. [Alternatively, one is to eat the product within a meal of bread, if it is a food that can be exempt with Hamotzi. This indeed is the better option, as in such a case there’s no doubt at all regarding the blessing.[329]]

Correct blessing is Shehakol but had in mind also a non-Shehakol food or was on table: See Halacha 20!

General Principles

• If one realizes the error within “Kdei Dibbur” (the time it takes to say “Shalom Alecha Rebbe”), they should immediately correct themselves and conclude with the correct blessing.
• When in doubt (Safek), the rule is generally “Safek Brachos Lihakel”—do not repeat the blessing. Some prefer to say Shehakol on a different food to include the original one.
• For Shehakol, Bedieved (after the fact), it covers all foods.
• When the leader of the meal makes an error, whether listeners may say their own blessing depends on their intention and on varying opinions.

Practical Examples

• If you said Hamotzi on a piece of cake, you do not say Mezonos again before eating; after blessing is Al Hamichya.
• If you said Mezonos on bread, do not say Hamotzi again; say Shehakol on something else to cover all bases.
• If you said Ha’adama on an apple, you are yotzei and do not repeat Ha’etz.
• If you said Shehakol on anything, you are yotzei and do not repeat the blessing.

• Yotzei Bedieved
• SBL = Yotzei because of Machlokes and Safek Brachos Lihakel, although best to circumvent Machlokes.

X    Not Yotzei. Must Repeat Bracha

X*  Machlokes, but we conclude that one is Not Yotzei. Must Repeat Bracha

19. Said wrong Bracha Rishona and made correction:[332]

The following Halacha will deal with various errors that are made during blessing recital and their subsequent laws. In A we will deal with the law relevant when the intent was to say a wrong blessing and one only later realized and corrected himself. This case deals with whether initial intent to say the correct blessing is required for a blessing to be valid. In B we will deal with the law relevant when the intent was to say the correct blessing, but a slip of tongue caused the wrong blessing to be said.

1. Recited or began reciting wrong blessing due to mistaken identity of food and corrected self:

In the event that one began reciting the wrong blessing due to misidentifying the type of food in his hand, such as if he took a tomato thinking that it was an apple[333], and began reciting the blessing of Haeitz over it, then the following is the law:

Discovered mistake after saying the words Baruch Ata Hashem:[334] If one discovered the mistake immediately after saying the words Baruch Ata Hashem, then he should simply conclude with the correct blessing over the food. Thus, for example, if he took a cup of beer or water thinking that it was wine and began saying the blessing Baruch Ata Hashem with intent to conclude Borei Peri Hagafen, and then realized his mistake that the drink is really beer or water, then he should immediately conclude with the correct words of Shehakol Nihyah Bidvaro and through doing so he fulfills his obligation. [The same applies in the above case if one took a tomato thinking that it was an apple.]

Discovered mistake after finishing the blessing:[335] If one discovered the mistake only after saying the concluding words of the blessing, then if he corrects himself within Kdei Dibbur, which is the amount of time it takes to say Shalom to his Rebbe [which is the amount of time it takes to say the three words of “Shalom Alecha Rebbe”[336], which is 2-3 seconds[337]] then he fulfills his obligation. If however he only corrected himself after this amount of time has passed, then he does not fulfill his obligation and must repeat the correct blessing [if the item of the original blessing is not in front of him, as explained next]. For example, if he took a cup of beer or water thinking that it was wine and recited the entire blessing of Borei Peri Hagafen, and only then realized his mistake that the drink is really beer or water, then if he immediately corrects himself and concludes with the correct words of Shehakol Nihyah Bidvaro within Kdei Dibbur, then he fulfills his obligation. [The same applies in the above case of one who took a tomato thinking that it was an apple.]

If the item of original blessing was in front of him:[338] In the event that one recited the entire blessing and only realized his mistake after Kdei Dibbur, and one has the item of the original blessing which he planned to consume in front of him, then he does not need to repeat the blessing over it [although he does need to repeat the blessing over the current food]. For example, if he had a cup of water in his hand thinking that it was wine which was taken from the wine bottle that is sitting right in front of him which he planned to drink from, and hence accidentally recited the blessing of Hagafen, then even if he only realized his mistake after he drank the water, nonetheless, the blessing of Hagafen still counts towards the wine that is in the bottle which is in front of him. He may hence go ahead and drink the wine without repeating the blessing even if he drank from the cup of water in between, as this drinking of water does not consist of a Hefsek.

• Example: You pick up a tomato, thinking it is an apple, and begin the blessing “Baruch Ata Hashem… Borei Pri Ha’etz.” Realizing your mistake before finishing, you correct yourself and end with “Borei Pri Ha’adama.” Because you corrected yourself right away, your blessing is valid for the tomato.
• Example: You pick up a cup of water, thinking it is wine, and recite “Baruch Ata Hashem… Borei Pri Hagafen.” Only after finishing do you notice your mistake. If you immediately correct yourself—within the time it takes to say “Shalom Alecha Rebbe”—by saying “Shehakol Nihyah Bidvaro,” your blessing for the water is valid. If more time passes, you must recite a new blessing for the water.
• Example: You have wine and water in front of you and plan to consume both. By mistake, you bless the water with “Borei Pri Hagafen,” thinking it’s wine, and only realize afterward. Since the wine is still present, your blessing counts for the wine, and you may drink it without repeating the blessing.

1. Recited wrong blessing due to slip of tongue and corrected self:[339]

If one had in mind to say the correct blessing over the food and his tongue slipped and recited a different incorrect blessing, then if he corrected himself within Kdei Dibur, then he has fulfilled his obligation.[340] If however he only corrected himself after the amount of time of Kdei Dibbur, then he does not fulfill his obligation even though he had in mind to say the correct blessing, as in actuality he did not do so.[341] For example, if he had a cup of water in his hand knowing that it was water, and intended on saying the correct blessing of Shehakol and his tongue slipped and he accidentally recited the blessing of Hagafen, then he only fulfills his obligation if he corrects himself and says Shehakol within Kdei Dibbur. 

• Intending to say Mezonos on a cookie, your tongue slips and you say “Borei Pri Ha’etz.” If you correct yourself within the brief window (“Shalom Alecha Rebbe”), and say “Borei Minei Mezonos,” you fulfill your obligation. If you correct yourself after a longer delay, you need to recite the correct blessing again.

20. Ha’adama counting for Haeitz – When a lower blessing [i.e. Bracha Kolelels of Ha’adama] on one food exempts another food of a higher blessing [i.e. Bracha Peratis of Haeitz]:[342]

Introduction:

This Halacha should not be confused with Halacha 18 in which we discussed the cases in which one fulfills his obligation upon saying the wrong blessing over a food [i.e., Said Shehakol on bread]. In this Halacha, we build off the information explained there, and address the extended scenario of a case in which one said the blessing on the correct food, although had in mind, or had in front of him, another food of a different blessing, with which one fulfills his obligation Bedieved if that blessing was recited on it. [In other words, do we say that the ability for an incorrect blessing to be valid for food only applies when one accidentally said that blessing directly on that food, or applies even if he said the blessing on the correct food and simply had the incorrect food in mind or in front of him.]

• Example: One recited a Ha’adama on a pineapple having in mind also an apple. Is he Yotzei the blessing on the apple?
• One recited a Ha’adama on a pineapple while an apple was sitting before him. Is he Yotzei the blessing on the apple?

1. No Intent – Said Ha’adama on a vegetable and did not have Kavana to be Motzi the Haeitz fruit:[343]

If one had a fruit and vegetable in front of him and recited the blessing of Ha’adama on the vegetable [which was more beloved to him[344]], without having any intent for the blessing to exempt the fruit, then he must recite the blessing of Haeitz on the fruit.[345] [This certainly applies if the fruit was not even in front of him but was brought to the table while he was still eating the Ha’adama vegetable, in which case he certainly must recite the blessing of Haeitz on the fruit.]

• Example 1 — No Intent to Include the Other Food: You have a plate of cucumbers (Ha’adama) and an apple (Ha’eitz) sitting in front of you. You recite the blessing “Borei Pri Ha’adama” over the cucumbers, thinking only of the cucumbers. After finishing, you eat the apple. Since you did not have the apple in mind and only said Ha’adama for the vegetable, you must now recite the Ha’eitz blessing before eating the apple.

1. Intent – Said Ha’adama on vegetable and had Kavana to be Motzi the Haeitz fruit:

If one recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a vegetable and had in mind to be Motzi with this blessing also a fruit, then some Poskim[346] rule that he is Yotzei the blessing over the fruit and does not say the blessing of Haeitz upon eating the fruit. This applies even if the fruit was not in front of him at the time that he recited the original blessing of Ha’adama on the vegetable but had in mind to eat the fruit and exempt it with the blessing of Ha’adama.[347] However, other Poskim[348] argue and rule that the blessing of Ha’adama is never valid for a fruit unless he accidentally recited the blessing of Ha’adama on the actual fruit.[349] However, when the blessing is being recited on its rightful food, then it can never exempt with it a food of a different blessing, even with intent. Hence, in the above case one must recite the blessing of Haeitz on the fruit, even if it was in front of him on the table and he had in mind to exempt it with the blessing of Ha’adama. Practically, [Safek Brachos Lihakel, and hence the blessing is not to be repeated as rules the first opinion if he explicitly had in mind to exempt it with the blessing[350], unless one makes a Hefsek of Hesech Hadaas which is recommended[351], however] initially one must be aware to never intend to exempt an Haeitz food with the blessing of Ha’adama, in order to recite the blessing according to all opinions.[352]

• Example 2 — Explicit Intent to Include the Other Food: You plan to eat both a carrot (Ha’adama) and an apple (Ha’eitz). You say “Borei Pri Ha’adama” on the carrot, with the specific intention of having this blessing cover the apple as well. According to some opinions, you fulfill your obligation for the apple with the Ha’adama, and do not need to say Ha’eitz before eating the apple. However, other authorities disagree, so the best practice is not to rely on this and to recite Ha’eitz on the apple.

1. Wine and grapes – Said Hagafen on wine and intended also on grapes or raisins:[353]

If one recited the blessing of Hagafen on wine and intended to also include grapes or raisins in his blessing, then one fulfills his obligation over the grapes and raisins and is not required to repeat the blessings. Nevertheless, one is not initially to intend upon him saying the blessing of Hagafen on the wine to also fulfill the obligation of the grapes or raisins. Rather, he is to say its own designated blessing of Haeitz on the grapes and raisins after reciting the blessing of Hagafen on the wine.

21. Repeating the blessing on a second food of same blessing – Must a blessing be repeated upon eating a subsequent food & when can a single blessing count for many foods of that same blessing:[358]

There is no requirement to always recite an individual blessing on every single food that one eats, if they share the same blessing, and under certain circumstances a single blessing can count for many foods. In such cases, it is forbidden to repeat the blessing, as explained in chapter 3 regarding the prohibition of reciting an unnecessary blessing due to the prohibition of saying a blessing in vain. Hence, this law will deal with the scenarios in which a single blessing counts on behalf of many different foods of that same blessing versus the scenarios in which a new blessing must be repeated even though the foods share the same blessing. For example, if a person recited a blessing of Haeitz on an apple, should the blessing be repeated over a subsequent orange which he now plans to eat or is it included in the original blessing of Haeitz? What about the scenario in which he plans on eating a second apple, is a second blessing to be recited? Does it make a difference as to what were one’s original plans at the time that he recited the blessing? Does it make a difference if the foods were already on the table? Is there a difference if the second food is a food of greater importance? So, indeed each of these questions are a factor in the final ruling regarding whether a new blessing must be repeated or not.

• Example 1: I recited a blessing of Haeitz on an apple, and I now decided to eat an orange, should I repeat the blessing prior to eating the orange?
• Example 2: I recited a blessing of Mezonos on pasta, and somebody then brought a cracker to the table, must the blessing of Mezonos be repeated?
• Example 3: I recited a blessing of Sheheakol on a piece of chocolate, and then decided to eat a piece of cheese. Should the blessing of Shehakol be repeated?

*Important note: This law will not deal with the separate scenario in which a blessing must be repeated over the same food which was included in the original blessing in the event of Hesech Hadas[359], or Shinuiy Makom. This matter will be explained at length in Chapters 19-20.

1. Kavana – Had in mind to eat the other foods:[360]

If at the time that one recited the original blessing over a given food one had in mind to eat a second food of a similar blessing, or to eat a Tafel food to the first Ikar food even if it is of a different blessing[361], then a second blessing is not to be repeated upon eating the second food. This applies even if one has already finished eating the original food over which the blessing was recited[362] and even if the second food is not similar to the first food at all, but simply shares the same blessing. This applies even if one did not explicitly have in mind upon saying the original blessing to be Motzi the second food with the blessing and have it be included in the blessing, but merely had in mind to eat it.[363] [Due to Safek, this applies even if the second food is a more significant food, however, initially, one should have a more significant food specifically in mind to include it within the blessing, as explained in D!]

• For example – Apple & Orange:[364] If one recited a Haeitz on an apple that was in front of him and at the time that he said the blessing he also planned on eating an orange which was not in front of him, then a blessing is not repeated upon eating the orange even if he did not explicitly have in mind to include the orange within the blessing. This applies even if he begins eating the orange after having completed the eating of the apple.
• Water & Meat: If one recited a Shehakol on a cup of water and at the time that he said the blessing he also planned on eating a piece of meat, then a blessing is not repeated upon eating the meat even if he did not explicitly have in mind to include the meat within the blessing. This applies even if he begins eating the meat after having completed the drinking of the water.

The law by a guest: See Halacha F!

1. Foods that are on the table – Repeating the blessing for other foods which were on the table when the blessing was recited:[368]

If at the time that one recited the original blessing there were other foods in front of him[369] of a similar blessing, or if there was in front of him a Tafel food to the first Ikar food even if it is of a different blessing[370], then a second blessing is not to be repeated upon eating the second food that is in front of him. This applies even if one did not have in mind to eat the second food that was in front of him at the time that he recited the original blessing, and applies even if one has already finished eating the original food over which the blessing was recited[371] and even if the second food is not similar to the first food at all, but simply shares the same blessing. [Due to Safek, this applies even if the second food is a more significant food, however, initially, one should have a more significant food specifically in mind to include it within the blessing, as explained in D!]

• For example – Apple & Orange:[372] If one had an apple and orange in front of him and he recited a Haeitz on the apple without intent to also eat the orange and then decided to also eat the orange, then a blessing is not repeated upon eating the orange even if he begins eating the orange after having completed the eating of the apple.
• Water & Meat: If one recited a Shehakol on a cup of water and at the time that he said the blessing there was a piece of meat on the table, then a blessing is not repeated upon eating the meat even if he begins eating the meat after having completed the drinking of the water.

1. No Kavana, and not originally on table – Must the blessing be repeated upon eating a subsequent food:[373]

The previous law dealt with when a single blessing covers foods that one has in front of him or that he eventually plans on eating. This law will deal with the case in which another food of the same blessing was brought to the person, which he did not have in mind originally to eat, and as to whether a new blessing must be recited.

Case 1 – Same food:[374] If after reciting a blessing on a food and then eating that food, more of the same exact[375] food was brought to the table, then some Poskim[376] rule that a blessing is not to be repeated upon eating this subsequent portion of that food even if he did not have in mind at the time that the original blessing was recited to eat a second portion, and even if it was not in front of him at the time, so long as he has not performed explicit[377] Hesech Hadas against eating anymore[378] [as explained in Chapter 19 regarding the laws of Hesech Hadas]. This applies even if one has already finished eating the first portion of food over which the blessing was recited.[379] However, other Poskim[380] rule that one must always repeat the blessing on the second food if he did not have intent to eat it when he recited the blessing over the first food and it was not in front of him at the time of the blessing, even if it is a second portion of that same exact food[381] and he is still in the midst of eating the first food, and even if he has yet to even begin eating the first food [i.e. the second food was brought to the table as he finished his blessing].[382] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakel, and hence the blessing is not to be repeated even if he completely finished eating the first food.[383] However, initially one should circumvent this dispute by explicitly intending upon saying the blessing for the blessing to cover all future foods of a similar blessing that will be brought to the table.[384] [Due to Safek, this law applies even if the second food is a more significant food, however, initially, one should especially have a more significant food specifically in mind to include it within the blessing, as explained in D!]

• For example: If one recited a Haeitz on one apple and a second apple [even if of different color or taste[385]] was now brought to the table, it is a dispute if the blessing is to be repeated over the second apple, and practically we rule that the blessing is not to be repeated even if he did not have in mind to eat the second apple at the time that he originally recited the blessing, and even if one already finished eating the entire 1st apple, so long as one did not have explicit Hesech Hadaas to no longer eat any more apples after finishing the first apple. However, initially one should circumvent this Safek by explicitly intending upon saying Haeitz on the first apple to cover all future foods of a similar blessing that will be brought to the table.

Case 2 – Completely different foods but similar blessing:[386] If after reciting a blessing on a food a completely[387] different type of food that happens to share the same before blessing as the first food was now brought to the table, then if he did not have in mind at the time that the original blessing was recited to eat this food, then since the two foods are not similar in nature, one must repeat the blessing on the second food. This applies even if one still has some of the original food remaining which he has yet to finish eating. The same applies if the second food is a Tafel to the first food, if he did not have in mind at the time that the original blessing was recited on the Ikar to also eat the Tafel, then a new blessing must be said on the Tafel.

• For example: If one recited a Shehakol on a cup of water and a piece of fish was brought to the table, then the blessing must be repeated over the fish if he did not have in mind at the time that he recited Shehakol that he would eat the fish.
• Likewise, if one recited a Shehakol on fish and a piece of cheese was brought to the table, then the blessing must be repeated over the cheese if he did not have in mind at the time that he recited Shehakol that he would eat the cheese.

Case 3 – Related foods and similar blessing:[388] If after reciting a blessing on a food, a similar, but not exact, type of food that shares the same before blessing as the first food was now brought to the table, then some Poskim[389] rule that even if he did not have in mind at the time that the original blessing was recited to eat this food, then since the two foods are similar in nature, then if one did not yet finish eating the first food, then the blessing is not to be repeated on the second food. If, however, one did finish eating the first food and no longer has any of the first food available in front of him, then a blessing is to be repeated.[390] However, other Poskim[391] rule that one must always repeat the blessing on the second food if he did not have intent to eat it when he recited the blessing, even if he is still in the midst of eating the first food, and even if he has yet to even begin eating the first food [i.e. the second food was brought to the table as he finished his blessing].[392] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakel, and hence if he is still in the midst of eating the first food the blessing is not to be repeated.[393] However, initially one should circumvent this dispute by explicitly intending upon saying the blessing for the blessing to cover all future foods of a similar blessing that will be brought to the table.[394] [Due to Safek, this law applies even if the second food is a more significant food, however, initially, one should especially have a more significant food specifically in mind to include it within the blessing, as explained in D!]

• For example:[395] If one recited a Haeitz on an apple and an orange was brought to the table, then [according to all opinions] the blessing must be repeated on the orange if he already finished eating the apple and no longer has any more apples available in front of him, and [due to Safek Brachos Lihakel] is not to be repeated if he is still in the midst of eating the apple.
• Likewise, if one recited a Shehakol on chicken and a piece of meat was brought to the table, then [according to all opinions] the blessing must be repeated on the meat if he already finished eating the chicken and no longer has any more chicken available in front of him, and [due to Safek Brachos Lihakel] is not to be repeated if he is still in the midst of eating the chicken.
• For example:[396] If one recited a Shehakol on water, and coffee was brought to the table, then the blessing must be repeated on the coffee if he already finished drinking the water and no longer has any more water available in front of him, and [due to Safek Brachos Lihakel] is not to be repeated if he is still in the midst of drinking the water.

1. The law of Chashuv – Having a Chashuv food which receives precedence included in a previous blessing:[397]

Some Poskim[398] rule that the above cases in which one is not required to repeat the blessing on the second food only applies if the first and second food are equal in their importance, which is determined by the fact that the second food does not receive Halachic precedence over the first food in the event that they were both present before the person at the time of the blessing. However, in all cases that one had no intent of eating a second food at the time that he recited the original blessing on the first food, then if the second food is of greater importance and significance [i.e. Chashuv] than the first food to the point that if one were to desire to eat both foods simultaneously then he would be required to precede the blessing of the significant food [as explained in Chapter 18], then a new blessing must be repeated over the significant food.[399] This applies even if the significant food was in front of the person at the time that he recited the original blessing on the first food.[400] Furthermore, this applies even if one had in mind to eat the second food at the time that he said the blessing over the first food but did not have explicit intent to include it[401] within the blessing.[402] However, if he did have explicit intent to include it within the blessing, then it is included in the blessing even if the food was not on the table at that time. Other Poskim[403], however, argue on all the above and rule that there is no difference at all between a food of greater significance and a food of non-greater significance, and the rule always remains that if the two foods were on the table at the time that the original blessing was recited [or one had in mind to eat the second food at the time that he recited the blessing over the first food, or even if it was not on the table and he did not have in mind to eat it, but it was brought to the table prior to finishing eating the first fruit according to those Poskim[404] who exempt it in such a case[405]], then it is included in the blessing that was recited over the first food even if the second food is a more Chashuv food which is initially required to be preceded over the first food when they’re both in front of him, and even though he did not explicitly have in mind to exempt the more significant food with the blessing of the less significant food. Practically, [Safek Brachos Lihakel and hence if this occurred the blessing is not to be repeated on the more significant food[406] if it was in front of him, or one had in mind to eat it[407], however] in order to avoid the question, one must initially beware to always have explicitly in mind to be Motzi the Chashuv food upon saying the blessing on the first less Chashuv food in the event that the more significant food is not in front of him, and if it is in front of him than one is to simply recite the blessing on the Chashuv food.[408]

• Example:[409] If one had in front of him a cooked Mezonos food [i.e. Maaseh Kedeira, such as chulent; spaghetti, Sufganiyot, etc] and a baked Mezonos food which is defined as Pas Haba Bekisnin and can become Hamotzi if he is Koveia Seuda [i.e. a Mezonos pretzel, or cracker], then although both share the blessing of Mezonos, if he said the blessing of Mezonos on the cooked Mezonos food [which can never become Hamotzi even if he is Koveia Seuda] then according to the first opinion he must say another Mezonos on the Pas Haba Bekisnin food unless he explicitly had intent to include it within the blessing. Practically, Safek Brachos Lihakel and hence if this occurred the blessing is not to be repeated on the more significant food, although in order to avoid the question, one is to simply recite the blessing on the Pas Haba Bekisnin if it is in front of him, or explicitly have it in mind if it is not in front of him.
• Example 2: If one said Mezonos on a cooked Mezonos food [i.e. Maaseh Kedeira, such as chulent; spaghetti, Sufganiyot, etc] with intent to also eventually eat a baked Mezonos food which is defined as Pas Haba Bekisnin [i.e. a Mezonos pretzel, or cracker], then it is disputed if he must say another Mezonos on that food. This applies so long as he did not have explicitly in his mind to exempt the Pas Haba Bekisinin food with his blessing of Mezonos which he recited on the cooked Mezonos food, otherwise everyone agrees that the second food is included in the blessing of the first food. Practically, Safek Brachos Lihakel and hence if this occurred the blessing is not to be repeated on the more significant food
• If one recited a Haeitz on an apple and a grape was brought to the table, then according to all opinions the blessing must be repeated on the grape if he already finished eating the apple and no longer has any more apples available in front of him, and [due to Safek Brachos Lihakel] is not to be repeated if he is still in the midst of eating the apple.

1. Ikar Vetafel – The law when a Tafel is brought after saying a blessing on the Ikar:[410]

See Chapter 17 Halacha 1 for more details on this subject![411]

Had Tafel in mind upon saying blessing on Ikar: If at the time that one recited the blessing on a main food [i.e. Ikar] one had in mind to also eat the secondary food [i.e. Tafel] then the blessing is not to be recited over the Tafel even if the Ikar food has already been finished. This applies even if one has already finished eating the Ikar food over which the blessing was recited[412] and even if the Tafel food is not similar to the first food at all [and does not even share the same blessing]. This applies even if one did not explicitly have mind upon saying the original blessing on the Ikar to be Motzi the Tafel with the blessing, but merely had in mind to eat it.[413]

• For example: If one recited a Shehakol on whisky with intent of eating fish or cheese [or a pickle] afterwards as a chaser, then the blessing of She’hakol [or Ha’adama] is not to be recited on the fish or cheese [or pickle].

Tafel was on table upon saying blessing on Ikar:[414] If at the time that one recited the original blessing on the Ikar there was a Tafel food in front of him, then a second blessing is not to be repeated upon eating the Tafel food that is in front of him. This applies even if the Tafel food is of a different blessing, and even if one did not have in mind to eat the Tafel food that was in front of him at the time that he recited the blessing on the Ikar, and applies even if one has already finished eating the Ikar food over which the blessing was recited[415] and even if the second food is not similar to the first food at all.

• For example: If one recited a Shehakol on whisky without intent of also eating the fish or cheese [or pickle] afterwards as a chaser, then if these foods were in front of him when he recited the blessing on the Ikar then then blessing of She’hakol [or Ha’adama] is not to be recited on the fish or cheese [or pickle].

Did not have Tafel in mind upon saying blessing on Ikar: If at the time that one recited the blessing on a main food [i.e. Ikar] one did not have in mind to eat the Tafel [and it was not present before him] and then later decided to do so, then a separate blessing must be recited upon eating the Tafel. This applies even if one did not yet finish the eating of the Ikar [and even if he plans on eating the two foods together[416]] and even if they share the same blessing, and even if eating the Tafel will cause one to eat more of the Ikar [if the two foods are not of similar nature as explained in C[417]].

• For example: If one recited a Shehakol on beer or whisky without intent of eating fish or cheese [or a pickle] afterwards as a chaser to sweeten the drink, and he then decided to eat them as a chaser, then the blessing of She’hakol [or Ha’adama] is to be recited on the fish or cheese [or pickle]. This applies even if one did not yet finish drinking the beer or whisky, and even though eating the fish will cause one to want to drink more beer.
• If one recited a Mezonos on a cracker without any intent of eating it together with another food, and then decided to eat it with a Chumus dip, then the blessing of Shehakol must be recited on the Chumus dip.[418]

Exceptions – Law of Kevius and common Ikar-Tafel: See Chapter 17 Halacha 1C.

1. The law by guests:[419]

The entire law above in which one may be required to repeat or recite a new blessing over a second food due to it not being included within the blessing that was recited over the first food, only applies to an individual who is eating his own food [i.e. at home, in a restaurant, etc]. However, one who was invited to eat as a guest on another person’s table, never repeats the same blessing over any subsequent food even if he was unaware that this food would be served.[420] This applies even if the original food has already been eaten, and the second food has no similarity to the original food, but simply shares the same blessing. However, if he was not invited as a guest and simply showed up to the table for a temporary visit then he must repeat a blessing for every food that he is given, even if it is the same food, even if he has yet to finish his first food.[421] [However, if he plans to stay for the meal, or was invited to partake in whatever food that he wants, then this follows the same laws as a regular guest.]

Chashuv foods:[422] It is questionable whether the before blessings of a guest covers also the more significant foods that the host will serve them. Accordingly, in order to avoid the above question, it is proper for the guests to explicitly have in mind to exempt also the more significant foods.

• For example: If a guest recited a Shehakol on a cup of tea that he was served, then the blessing of Shehakol is not to be recited on any other food that he is served which receives the blessing of Shehakol, such as meat, fish, chicken, cheese, etc.
• For example:[423] If a guest recited a Haeitz on an apple that he was served, then the blessing of Haeitz is not to be recited on any other fruit that he is served.
• Hotel or school dining room, reception:[424] Those who eat together in a dining room, such as in hotels and educational institutions who serve breakfast or lunch or dinner, are not to repeat any of the same blessings on subsequent foods, being that when they say the blessing on one food, it includes all the other foods being that they are similar to a guest who is being fed by his host. The same would apply by a guest who attends a reception such as for a wedding or Bar Mitzvah, that even if he does not wash on bread, he is not to repeat the same before blessing on any subsequent food or drink.
• Kiddush in Shul:[425] When attending a Kiddush in shul after Davening he is not to repeat the same before blessing on any subsequent food or drink. Thus, if he already said Mezonos on a cracker, it should not be repeated upon eating the Kugel or Chulent later on. Likewise, if one already said a Shehakol on a food or beverage, it should not be repeated upon eating meat that is served later on into the Kiddush.
• A husband who is served by his wife or children:[426] A husband and father who is served by his wife and children seemingly does not have the same status as a guest and must repeat the blessings in accordance to the laws delineated above, as he is the true decider of what he will eat and what he will not eat, and hence it is not considered as if he has all the future foods in mind.[427] However, some Poskim[428] rule that he does have the status of a guest in this regard.

1. Kavana to only eat or drink certain amount and then changed mind:[429]

One who recited a blessing on food or drink and had intent at the time of the blessing to only eat one or two of that food, such as one or two fruits, and to only drink one or two cups of the beverage, then if he decides to eat or drink more than his initial intent, then he must repeat the before blessing prior to doing so. This applies even if he changes his mind while he is still in the middle of eating the original amount of food or drink. [However, an after blessing is not recited until he finishes all of his eating or drinking.]

Table: When Must a Blessing Be Repeated?

22. Lost food – What one is to do in the event that after the blessing the food spilled or got lost:[430]

If one recited a blessing over a food or drink and prior to being able to eat or drink it, it fell or spilled and got lost or ruined to the point that it is no longer fit to be eaten, then the following is the law regarding what one can do to save the blessing from having been said in vain:

Has more of that food before him:[431] In the event that one contains more of that same[432] food in front of him on the table or bench, then if he explicitly[433] intended to also eat or drink from that food, then the blessing does not need to be repeated and he is to immediately take from that food on the basis of the blessing he said on the original food which spilled. However, if one did not explicitly have in mind to eat or drink more than the original amount that he held during the blessing [which eventually fell and spilled], then the blessing is considered to have been said in vain, and he must repeat the blessing prior to eating more of that food which is on the table.[434] [Thus, if there is even a small amount of food or liquid remaining from what spilled then he is to simply eat or drink the leftovers which did not spill in order to save the blessing.]

Does not have more of that food before him:[435] If one does not have more of that same food in front of him, then the blessing is considered to have been said in vain, and he must repeat the blessing prior to eating more of that food, if he so decides to do so. This applies even if he had in mind to eat more of the food at the time that he said the original blessing.[436]

Eating with other people:[437] The above law only applies if one is eating by himself, however, if he’s eating with other people, and is saying a blessing also on their behalf then some Poskim[438] rule that even if his food becomes lost he can salvage the blessing through taking from the food that is in the hands of those who were gathered and eating it without talking in between. [Thus, for example, if a number of friends sat down for Lechaim and one of them is saying the blessing on behalf of everyone else and he dropped his cup of Lechaim, he should right away take a sip from one of his friends cups in order to salvage the blessing.]

Saying Baruch Shem Kevod Malchuso Leolam Vaed:[439] In all cases that one’s first blessing over the spilled or lost food is considered to have been said in vain, then he is to recite immediately afterwards the words “Baruch Shem Kivod Malchuso Liolam Vaed” [prior to him repeating the blessing of the additional food that was not on the table or that he did not explicitly have in mind to eat].

Saying Lamdayni Chukecha:[440] In all cases that the food or liquid spilled and became lost after reciting G-d’s name of “Ado-noy”, but prior to saying the word Elokeinu in the blessing then he should conclude with the words “Lamdayni Chukecha”, and in this way it appears as if he is reciting a verse of Scripture[441] and it is not considered a blessing in vain.

• Example: After reciting a blessing of Shehakol on a cup of water, one accidentally dropped the cup onto the floor. In the event that there is no more water remaining in front of him [including not even a few drops left in the cup which spilled], such as he poured himself a cup and brought it to the table where there is no water, then he must recite Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchusos Leolam Vaed, and repeat the blessing if he decides to take for himself another cup of water. In the event that there was more water on the table, such as he poured himself a cup of water from a bottle that was on the table, and the cup then spilled, then if there is more water remaining in the bottle in front of him, and he had originally explicitly intended to drink more water after finishing his cup, then he is to simply pour himself a 2nd cup of water on the basis of his blessing, and drink it without saying a new blessing over it. If, however, he had no intent of drinking more than that one cup of water, then he must recite Baruch Sheim Kevod Malchusos Leolam Vaed, and repeat the blessing if he decides to take for himself another cup of water.

Kiddush or Havdala wine spilled:[442]

In the event that after completing the recital of the blessings, the Kiddush or Havdala wine spilled prior to having a chance to drink from it, then if there is even a small amount of wine remaining in  the cup that he is able to drink from then he should drink from it. After drinking this wine he should pour himself another Revius of wine and drink it without saying a blessing.[443] If there is absolutely no leftover wine that he is able to drink then the following is the law:

One has a bottle of wine on the table: [444] If one had a bottle of wine on the table at the time of the blessing, then if he planned to drink more wine after Kiddush or Havdala, then he is to drink that wine without needing to repeat Kiddush or Havdala or the blessing of Hagafen. If he did not have in mind to drink more wine after Kiddush or Havdala then although he does not need to repeat the blessing of Kiddush or Havdala, he is to repeat the blessing of Hagafen and drink that wine.[445]

One did not have any wine on the table:[446] He is to pour himself another cup of wine and recite the blessing of Hagafen.[447] He is not to repeat the blessing of Kiddush or Havdala.

23. Drinking water by a river [or running faucet]:[448]

It is permitted for one to say a blessing of Shehakol on the bed of a river [or after opening the faucet] with intent to drink from its flowing water, even though one will not drink from the water that is in front of him at the time the blessing was said and will rather drink from the new flow of water.[449]

24. Sitting versus standing during before blessings:

See also Chapter 2 Halacha 14!

Birchas Hanehnin – Blessings of pleasures [i.e. food, drink, spices]: Blessings that are recited over pleasures, such as before and after eating food and drink, may be recited in either a standing or sitting position.[450] This is with exception to the after blessing of Birchas Hamazon[451], and according to some Poskim[452] also Meiyn Shalosh [i.e. Al Hamichya/Peiros/Gefen] and so is the practical directive[453], which must be recited in a sitting position. Furthermore, some Poskim[454] rule that it is proper for all blessing over food to be recited in a sitting position, whether a before blessing or an after blessing. [All the above is only with regards to whether the blessing should be recited in a sitting or standing position, however, regarding the eating, it should always be consumed in a sitting position.[455]]

Being Yotzei or Motzi a blessing:[456] By all Birchas Hanehnin, one cannot be Yotzei a blessing from another unless the group is Kavua together, which is defined as sitting together. Thus, if the listener remains standing, he does not fulfill his obligation being that he has excluded himself from the Kevius. This, however, only applies by a blessing said over a food for the sake of benefit and pleasure, and not when it is said over a Mitzvah for the sake of being Motzi others.[457] Furthermore, some Poskim[458] rule that one is specifically to stand when being Yotzei a blessing of a Mitzvah, and so is the custom by Shofar and Megillah. However, other Poskim[459] rule that it is not necessary for the listeners to stand for the recital of the blessing and so is the custom of certain communities.

25. Giving food to a non-religious person:[460]

Offering food to a non religious Jew touches upon the prohibition against causing a fellow Jew to stumble in sin, as he will likely eat the food without a blessing. The following is the law:

One should only offer food to one who one knows will recite a blessing.[461] However, some are lenient if one gives the food to a pauper as charity.[462] However, if one knows for certain that he will not say a blessing, then it is forbidden to offer him food even as charity.[463] However, some Poskim[464] are lenient altogether to permit giving food to individuals who will not recite a blessing, and doing so does not transgress Lifnei Iver.[465] Practically, when offering food to someone who may not recite a blessing, one should tell him to recite a blessing beforehand and offer him a Kipa to do so.[466] However, in the event that one is unable to do so, such as due to fear of shaming the individual or causing a Chilul Hashem, then one may offer him the food regardless.[467] Certainly, one may offer food and beverage to a nonreligious Jew to establish a relationship for the sake of Kiruv.[468]

• Example: You invite a non-religious colleague to a holiday meal and, before serving, gently mention the tradition of reciting a blessing, perhaps offering a kipa to help make the moment meaningful. If they decline, you proceed with kindness, prioritizing the relationship.
• Example: While volunteering at a community food bank, you encounter recipients who may not observe religious practices. Out of respect, you may offer food without expectation, focusing on charity and avoiding embarrassment.
• Example: At a luncheon with potential outreach participants, you serve refreshments even if not all present are expected to say a blessing, recognizing the value of hospitality in building bridges for future dialogue.
• Example: During a large family gathering, you notice a relative who does not typically recite blessings. You discreetly encourage the custom, but if they are uncomfortable, you offer the meal nonetheless to maintain harmony.
• Example: In an educational setting, sharing snacks with students from varied backgrounds, you might explain the tradition and invite participation, but ultimately provide food regardless of religious observance, fostering inclusion and understanding.

26. Reciting blessings out loud versus silently:

Some Poskim[469] rule one is to specifically recite blessings aloud in order to have others answer Amen after the blessing. One is to try to have at least two people answer Amen after the blessing.[470] If one suspects that the people who hear his blessing will not answer Amen, then he is certainly to avoid saying the blessing aloud.[471]

The Chabad custom: See Chapter 4 Halacha 7! The widespread Chabad custom is to recite blessings quietly.[472] [This custom however only applies to private blessings, such as over a food or a personal Mitzvah, and only when other people may also desire to eat or perform the Mitzvah, and hence they will be saying their own blessing. If however the blessing will not be said by others, and certainly if the blessing is said on behalf of the public such as Birchas Hatorah by an Aliyah, then it is to be said aloud. Likewise, in instances that saying the blessings aloud helps educate the listeners in saying the blessing, then it should be said aloud. Likewise, this custom obviously does not exempt one from saying the words properly and with concentration, and only relates to the audibility of the blessing. However, those who say the blessing quietly and quickly, swallowing the words, certainly are not doing the proper thing.]

_________________________________________________________

[1] Ketzos Hashulchan chapter 55-56

[2] Seder 8:10; Luach 2:11; Admur 167:4 and 168:7 regarding Hamotzi; Michaber 210:1; Rambam Brachos 1:2, 3:12; Rif Brachos 27b; Tosafus Brachos 39a; Rosh Brachos 6:16; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:5

[3] The reason: As it is forbidden to benefit from this world any amount without saying a blessing. [Admur 168:7, Seder and Luach ibid]

[4] Admur 168:7 and 167:4; Seder 8:10 and Luach 2:11 regarding Bracha Rishona; Michaber 168:9; 210:1; Yerushalmi Brachos 7:1; Rambam Brachos 3:12

[5] The reason: As it is forbidden to benefit from this world any amount without saying a blessing. [Admur 168:7, Seder and Luach ibid]

[6] 1^st opinion in Admur 167:4; 1^st opinion in Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; 1^st opinion in Rokeiach 329; Implication of Rama 167:1 who says one must distribute a Kezayis to each eater; M”A 167:7 learns from Rama that it is an obligation to eat a Kezayis and M”A concludes that one is initially to be stringent like this opinion; Bach 475; Olas Tamid 167:11; Arizal in Shaar Hamitzvos Parshas Eikev; Yifei Laleiv 167:2; M”B 167:35 concludes it is proper to follow this opinion; Vetzaruch Iyun if Admur learns this opinion to require a Kezayis in all situations, or only when eating with others.

Answer of contradiction-Background and explanation: See Rama 167:1 that one must distribute a Kezayis to each eater and M”A 167:7 learns from here that it is an obligation to eat a Kezayis. Admur 167:4 rules that according to this opinion, the Kezayis must all be eaten in one shot. The Machatzis Hashekel 167:16 learns from here that one is not to talk until he swallows a full Kezayis. This may imply that Hamotzi may only be said over a Kezayis of bread, in clear contradiction to the ruling here that Hamotzi may be said on any amount. The Degul Merivava addresses this question and states that the intent of this ruling is not to say that perhaps only a Kezayis requires a blessing of Hamotzi, but rather that perhaps in order for the blessing of Hamotzi to cover an entire meal, one must eat a Kezayis of bread. On this the Machatzis Hashekel ibid states that it must initially be eaten without interval. So also explains Shulchan Hatahor 167:4 and 177:1; Kaf Hachaim 167:15. Practically, Admur a) implies that the entire discussion of Rama 167:1 is only regarding laws of Derech Eretz and not Brachos, hence avoiding any contradiction between the two places and b) Admur brings 2^nd opinion that does not require a Kezayis and concludes that so is the custom.

[7] Admur 176:4 rules the custom is like the 2^nd opinion; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 22

[8] See Seder 9:3; Admur 5:1; 185:1-2; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:1; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 4 Erech Berachos pp. 299

[9] Shara Ruach Hakodesh p. 4; Ketzos Hashulchan 55 footnote 1

[10] Admur 213:1; Implication of Admur 167:17

[11] See Admur 167:23; 197:6; 213:3; 273:6; Michaber 167:19; 213:2; Rosh Hashanah 29a; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Brachos Vol. 4 p. 344-350

[12] See Admur 167:15-17; 193:1-2; 213:1

[13] See Seder Birchas Hanehin 9:1-2; Luach 6:1-2; Admur 167:9; 206:3; 25:18-29 and 432:6 regarding Birchas Hamitzvos; Michaber 167:6; 206:3; Brachos 40a; M”B 167:34-43; 206:11-12; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:13-15; Kaf Hachaim 167:44-61; 206:14-22; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; 55:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7-14; 206:8-9; 11-14; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 4 Erech Berachos pp. 301

[14] See Seder 9:1-2; Luach 6:1; Admur 167:9; 206:3; 25:18-29 and 432:6 regarding Birchas Hamitzvos; Michaber 206:3; Brachos 40a; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; 55:1; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 4 Erech Brachos pp. 301

[15] Chayeh Adam in Nishmas Adam 5:12; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:2; Erech Hashulchan 206:3;  Tevuas Shur Y.D. 19; M”B 167:36; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:13; Biur Halacha 25:9 “Im Hifsik” based on Rosh in Halachos Ketanos; Kaf Hachaim 167:44 that so is implication of Michaber 167:6 and so is proven from Poskim who invalidate even saying Amen which is one word; Kaf Hachaim 206:17;  So rule regarding between two Mitzvos, such as between two pairs of Tzitzis: Olas Tamid 8:3; Elya Raba 8:13; P”M 8 A”A 14; Chayeh Adam 19:17; Kaf Hachaim 8:47

[16] M”B 167:35; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 22; See Admur in 168:7, Seder 8:10, Luach 2:11 that any amount of eating requires a blessing, and hence once any amount is swallowed there is no longer an interval involved.

[17] Admur 167:10 and 18; 124:2 in parentheses; Taz 167:8; M”A 167:19; Mordechai Pesachim 35a; Rosh Pesachim 10:5; Tosafus Pesachim 101a; See Hearos Ubiurim 765 p. 49

[18] Meaning, that even if one decides to speak in between and not fulfill his obligation anymore with the blessing, he may not do so as this will cause him to need to recite a new blessing and it is forbidden to add an unnecessary blessings. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 167 footnote 82] However, certainly there is no obligation for one to fulfill his obligation with someone else’s blessing just so he does not have to say the blessing himself, and the above only applies in the event that he originally had in mind to fulfill his obligation, as in such a case he indeed has already fulfilled his obligation.

[19] See Halacha C regarding Bedieved!

^[20]  See Admur 124:2 in parentheses [regarding Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo]; Chayeh Adam 5:13 [regarding Amen]; Birchas Habayis 1:13; Ketzos Hashulchan 5:11; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:9

[21] The reason: As we rule that one who spoke after reciting a blessing, prior to doing the action, of matters unrelated to the blessing must repeat the blessing. All the more so, would this apply if one who speaks anytime during the actual a blessing that he must repeat the blessing. The reason for this is because by a short blessing all the words must be connected to each other, and sound like a single sentence. When one speaks in the middle, it invalidates the sentence irrelevant to what matter of speech was discussed. Likewise, it changes from the Nussach that the sages established and at times creates an interval between Hashem and Malchus, if he spoke in between those areas. [See Admur 124:2; Chayeh Adam 5:13; According to the above, it is not understood why Admur depends the question of whether answering Baruch Hu Uvaruch Shemo invalidates the blessing on the fact that he interrupted between G-d’s name and kingship, as in truth it should be invalidated regardless due to Hefsek, and Shinuiy Matbeia. Vetzaruch Iyun]

[22] Chayeh Adam 5:13

[23] Admur ibid; Chayeh Adam 5:13

[24] Seder 9:1; Luach 6:1; Admur 206:3; M”A 206:4; Kesef Mishneh Hilchos Kerias Shema 2:17 in name of Rabbeinu Yona; P”M 206 A”A 4; Kaf Hachaim 106:18

[25] See Admur 66:1

[26] Admur 167:9; Rama 167:6; Beis Yosef 167; Kol Bo 24

[27] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnote 75

[28] M”A 271:12 in name of Ritzba based on allowance to instruct animals to be fed between the blessing and eating being that doing so is a Biblical command;

[29] M”A 271:12 in name of Ritzba regarding Havdalah

[30] Implication of Admur 167:9 who explains the allowance to instruct to feed the animals between the blessing and eating, based on the fact that it’s connected to the meal and not because it is a command, and so is likewise implied from his ruling regarding Kiddush and Havdalah which is unlike the ruling of the M”A and Ritzba; Shulchan Shlomo 18 footnote 2 of Rav SZ”A concludes likewise

One who made a vow to not eat a certain food until he does such and such and then recited a blessing: If it is a Biblical vow, then he may fulfill the vow and then eat. If it is a Rabbinical vow, then he is to first eat and then perform the vow. [See Kaf Hachaim 167:55; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 76-78]

One who recited a blessing over a food and then remembered that he did not remove Teruma and Maaser from the food: He may separate the Teruma and Maaser now between the blessing and eating, and he is not required to repeat the blessing, being that it is for the sake of the food which does not invalidate the blessing. [Chazon Ish Dmaiy 15:5; Minchas Shlomo end of Sefer in Hashmatos; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 79-80]

One who recited a blessing over a food and then had a question as to its Kashrus status: He may look up the question and even ask a Rav between the blessing and eating. [Darkei Teshuvah Y.D. 19:47; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 79-80]

One forgot to wash hands on bread and remembered between Hamotzi and the eating: He is to immediately wash hands with a blessing, and then eat the bread without repeating the blessing beforehand. [Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 158:3; Biur Halacha 158:11 “Mivareich”; Igros Moshe O.C. 2:53; Piskeiy Teshuvos 158:26-27 footnote 135; Unlike Shaareiy Teshuvah 167:13 in name of Birkeiy Yosef 167:13 that he should first eat less then a Kezayis of bread and then  wash]

[31] Admur 59:4 regarding Amen after Habocheir Beamo Yisrael being a Hefsek and that the same applies to all Birchas Hamitzvos and Birchas Hanehnin; Michaber 59:4; Rambam Brachos 1:17; Ramban Likkutim Brachos beginning; Rameh brought in Talmidei Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 45b; Panim Meiros 2:5; Birkeiy Yosef 167:4; Elya Raba 167:7; Shaareiy Teshuvah 167: 3 or 11 in name of Panim Meiros 2:5; Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 13; Birchas Habayis 1:13; M”B 167:35; 206:12; 215:1; Shaar Hatziyon 215:2; Kaf Hachaim 167:44 and 61 and 206:19; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 23; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:9; See Orchos Chaim Din Kedusha Meyushav 4; Hearos Ubiurim 166:18; 167:7

[32] Admur 213:4; [See also Admur 8:11; 104:5; 124:6; 201:5] Michaber 213:2; Rambam Brachos 1:11; Brachos 45b

[33] Elya Raba ibid; Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 13; Kaf Hachaim 167:61

[34] Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 13; Birchas Habayis 1:13; Orchos Chaim 167 in name of Binyan Olam 5; Daas Torah 25; Kaf Hachaim 167:61 and 206:19; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 23 in name of Shulchan Hamareches in name of Binyan Olam that it is only initially forbidden while Bedieved, one is Yotzei if he did so; SSH”K 48:39 in name of Rav SZ”A and footnote 43; See also Chayeh Adam 5:13 that possibly one is still Yotzei if he answered Amen even in middle of a blessing; Implication of M”B ibid; Mateh Efraim 625:45; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:9 footnote 67-69 that Safek Brachos Lihakel and 167:11 regarding people who are Yotzei with blessing that if they answer Amen to another that they need not repeat the blessing; See also Shaareiy Teshuvah 213:4; 25:10 in name of Panim Meiros that Amen of another persons blessing between Yad and Rosh is not Hefsek Bedieved

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the blessing must be repeated if one answered Amen between the blessing and eating. [Panim Meiros 2:5; Shaareiy Teshuvah 167:3 or 11; Rav Alyashvili footnote 5 that seemingly even Bedieved one must repeat the blessing if he answered Amen prior to chewing the food however not if he spoke while chewing prior to swallowing food, in which case he is Yotzei Bedieved; See Shaar Hatziyon 215:2 that this is a dispute between the Magen Avraham and Taz; See M”B 215:1 that it is a Hefsek if they answered Amen to their own blessing]

[35] M”B 206:12; Biur Halacha 25 “Im”; Zechor Leyitzchak 38; Yabia Omer 8:24; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:9 and 11; So rule regarding if one answered between Shel Yad and Shel Rosh that it is a Hefsek: Admur 25:21; Siddur Admur [Letter 14 in Raskin]; M”A 25:17; Tur 25:10; Rosh ibid; Rashba 5:13; Igur 38; Elya Raba 27:14; Derech Hachaim; Kitzur SHU”A 10:9; Chayeh Adam 13:5; M”B 25:36; Birchas Habayis 38:4; Likkutei Maharich; Toras Chaim Sofer 25:20; Afikei Maginim 25:26; Piskeiy Teshuvos 25:18 footnote 137 that so is custom

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one does not repeat the blessing even if he answered Amen Yihei Shmei Raba. [Kaf Hachaim 167:61; So rule regarding if one answered between Shel Yad and Shel Rosh that it is not a Hefsek: Possible implication of Michaber 25:10 who omits above ruling [and so understand Achronim]; Mordechai Tefillin 12b in name of Rabbeinu Tam, brought in Beis Yosef 25:10; Taz 25:8; Mamar Mordechai 25:9; Nehar Shalom 25:5; Chesed Lealafim 25:8; Ben Ish Chaiy Vayeira 10; Shisilei Zeisim 25:20; Amudei Hashulchan on Kitzur 10:8 in name of Malbim; Kaf Hachaim 25:63 in Shulchan Shlomo 25:5; Shut Stam 25; Magen Giborim 25:21; Aruch Hashulchan 25:17]

[36] Admur 643:4 “This blessing is not considered a Hefsek between the blessing of Hamotzi and the eating being that this blessing is needed for the meal and any matter which is needed for the meal is not considered an interval.”; Michaber 643:3; Tur 643; Rosh Sukkah 4:3; Hagahas Rabbeinu Peretz in Tashbeitz ibid; See Kaf Hachaim 643:14-20; Nitei Gavriel Sukkos 45:3

[37] The reason: The blessing of Leishev Basukkah is not considered a Hefsek/interval between the blessing of Hamotzi and the eating, being that this blessing is needed for the meal, and any matter which is needed for the meal is not considered an interval, as explained in 167:9. [Admur ibid; See M”A 643:2; Beis Yosef 643; Levush 643:3; M”B 643:7; See also Admur 190:1; 296:1; 473:6; See Kaf Hachaim 643:15]

[38] Admur 581:3; M”A 583:2; Elya Raba 583:3; P”M 583 A”A 2; M”B 583:4; Kitzur SHU”A 129:9; M”E 583:1; Siddur Haarizal; Kaf Hachaim 583:16; The Chayeh Adam 139:6 and Mamar Mordechai 583:3 write to eat a small part of the apple without honey and then dip a second piece in honey and recite the Yehi Ratzon. [brought in Kaf Hachaim 583:13 and 16] The Sdei Chemed R”H 2:4 records the above option as well as another alternative option: Eat a different fruit with Haeitz and then say the Yehi Ratzon on the apple.

Bedieved: Even according to this opinion, Bedieved if one said the Yehi Ratzon prior to the initial eating he nevertheless fulfills his obligation of the blessing. [M”A 583:2; Elya Raba 583:3; M”E 583:1; Mamar Mordechai 583:3; Ashel Avraham Butchach 583; See Admur 167:9; 206:3; Seder 9:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; However see Rebbe in Igros Kodesh 3:140 that leaves the wording in Admur 583:3 with a Tzaruch Iyun.]

[39] Machzor Maglei Tzedek brought in M”A 583:2 [The M”A brings the opinion of Maglei Tzedek that one first says Yehi Ratzon and then eats the fruit although he himself concludes against this opinion]; This custom is also recorded in Sdei Chemed R”H 2:4 in name of Chemdas Yamim 4:6

[40] Igros Kodesh 3:140 [brought in Shaareiy Halacha Uminhag 2:239; Shulchan Menachem 3:86]; Sefer Haminhagim p. 118; Hayom Yom p. 92; Reshimos 4 p. 8 [Was the custom of Rebbe Rayatz and Rebbe Rashab. The Rebbe Rayatz told the Rebbe that it is a directive for the public and it was therefore publicized in Hayom Yom.] See Otzer Minhagei Chabad 138

Basis of custom in ruling of Admur in Siddur: In Igros Kodesh ibid the Rebbe explains our custom is rooted in the wording of Admur in his Siddur as Admur states “One needs to recite the blessing first and then afterwards say the Yehi ratzon”. The words “first and afterwards” are seemingly superfluous. Hence one must learn it is coming to teach us that one is to say the Yehi Ratzon immediately after the blessing of Haeitz. Thus, in conclusion Admur in the Siddur retracted his ruling from the Shulchan Aruch, and this is the source behind our custom. [Rebbe ibid]

The reason: The prohibition of making an interval between the blessing and eating is only a matter of Lechatchila in a case that the interval relates to the food. Now, since we Halachicly desire the Yehi Ratzon prayer to be recited as close as possible to the eating of the apple therefore in this case we allow even initially for one to say the Yehi Ratzon after the blessing, before the eating, as a time of need receives the same ruling as Bedieved. Now, regarding the reason why we desire the Yehi Ratzon prayer to be recited as close as possible to the eating of apple 1. See Sdei Chemed ibid who brings reasons according to Kabala for preceding the Yehi Ratzon to the eating 2. We desire the Yehi Ratzon to begin with a Bracha, similar to Tefilas Haderech [see 110:7] 3. We desire the Yehi Ratzon to be considered like a blessing in order to strengthen its power and effect. 4. A matter that is done for a good Omen must be grabbed at its first opportunity. Regarding why we do not precede the Yehi Ratzon to the blessing this is because a) It is similar to Leishev Bassukah that is not recited until after the blessing. [see 643] b) It is improper to precede the

request of man to the praise of Hashem in the blessing. [Rebbe ibid; see Alef Hamagen 583:13]

Alternative reason: It is only an interval if one says the Yehi Ratzon with Hashem’s name, while if Hashem’s name is not said, as is our custom, then it is not an interval. [Nitzutzei Rebbe 10 brought in Hiskashrus 547]

[41] Admur 271:15; Rama 271:5; Shiltei Hagiborim on Mordechai Brachos Remez 143 Os 15 in name of Teshuvas Hageonim; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10

[42] Admur 299:2; Rama 271:5; M”B 271:26; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that even by Havdalah, one is to recite Havdalah before eating the food and then repeat the blessing of Hamotzi. [M”A 271:12 in name of Ritzba]

[43] Admur 202:13 “There is no option to say the two blessings consecutively, as the second blessing would be an interval between the first blessing and its food”; M”A 206:3; Riem 1:4; Kneses Hagedola 206; Beir Heiytiv E.H. 62:3 in name of Riem; Kaf Hachaim 167:46;

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the second blessing does not serve as an interval between the first blessing and its eating. [So rule regarding one who recited Birchas Chasanim before Birchas Eirusin: Maharikash E.H. 62; Kneses Hagedola E.H. 62 in name of Rivash 82; Pischeiy Teshuvah E.H. 62:4; Zechor Leavraham 2 E.H. 2]

[44] Seder 9:1; Luach 6:1; Admur 167:9; 206:3; 271:15, 26; 25:18-20 and 432:6 regarding Birchas Hamitzvos; Michaber 167:6; Tur 167; Brachos 40a; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:13; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7

[45] Chayeh Adam in Nishmas Adam 5:12; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:2; Erech Hashulchan 206:3;  Tevuas Shur Y.D. 19; M”B 167:36; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:13; Kaf Hachaim 167:44 that so is implication of Michaber 167:6 and so is proven from Poskim who invalidate even saying Amen which is one word; Kaf Hachaim 206:17;  So rule regarding between two Mitzvos, such as between two pairs of Tzitzis: Olas Tamid 8:3; Elya Raba 8:13; P”M 8 A”A 14; Chayeh Adam 19:17; Kaf Hachaim 8:47

[46] The reason: As when one makes an interval between the blessing and eating it does not appear as if the blessing is counting on behalf of that food. [Admur 47:7]

[47] Admur 167:10 and 18; Taz 167:8; M”A 167:19; Beis Yosef 167; Mordechai Pesachim 35a; Rosh Pesachim 10:5; Tosafus Pesachim 101a; Ramban Pesachim 181; Peri Chadash 167:7; Elya Raba 167:13; Perach Shushan O.C. 1:14; Kneses Hagedola; Erech Hashulchan 167:4; Birkeiy Yosef 167:3 and Shiyurei Bracha 167:2; Zechor Leyitzchak 38; Chayeh Adam 5:11; M”B 167:43 that so rule almost all Poskim; Kaf Hachaim 167:58 that so is ruling even for Sephardim and we d not apply Saba”l in this case; See Hearos Ubiurim 765 p. 49 See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:11

The reason: As the law regarding the person who hears the blessing should not be any less stringent than the law applicable to the person who said the blessing, and just as by the person who said the blessing we rule that if he speaks of unrelated matters between the blessing and eating that he must repeat the blessing being that he made an interval between the blessing and eating, so too, we apply this rule to one who spoke between his hearing of the blessing and his eating, as one who hears a blessing is like one who recited it himself. [Admur ibid; Taz 167:8; Beis Yosef 167; See Admur 104:5 regarding Shomeia Keoneh]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if one of the participants spoke between him hearing the blessing and eating, then so long as the person who said the blessing has already eaten the food after his blessing, then they fulfill their obligation and may eat without repeating a new blessing beforehand. [Rama 167:6; Bach 167; Beis Yosef 167 in name of Rokeiach; See Kaf Hachaim 167:58] The same applies if any of the participants already ate the food. [Rikanti 59; Kneses Hagedola 167:81; Olas Tamid 167:10; Elya Raba 167:12; P”M 167 M”Z 8; See Kaf Hachaim 167:59]

If the Mivareich spoke: If the individual who recited the blessing spoke and invalidated his blessing, nonetheless the blessing remains valid for the participants and they may eat on the basis of his blessing. [P”M 167 M”Z 8; Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 16; M”B 213:15; 209:8; Shaar Hatziyon 213:18; Kaf Hachaim 167:59; Sdei Chemed Asifas Dinim Hefsek Yud; Yabia Omer 8:24; Mishneh Halachos 6:34] However, other Poskim rule the blessing is invalid for the listeners. [M”B 167:42 in implication of many Poskim, although concludes with Tzaruch Iyun] See Birchas Habayis 25:18 regarding Birchas Hamitzvos; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:12 in detail

[48] Admur 167:9; Michaber 167:6; Tur 167; Rebbe Yochanon in Brachos 40a; See Igros Kodesh 3:140; So rule also regarding Birchas Hamitzvos: Admur 25:19; 8:21; 432:6; 592:7; Olas Tamid 8:15; P”M 8 A”A 14; Kaf Hachaim 8:46

[49] The reason: As since he desires to eat the food when it is dipped in salt, therefore it is considered matters pertaining to the meal. [Admur 167:9; Taz 167:7; Bach 167; Beis Yosef 167; Olas Tamid 167:7; Kaf Hachaim 167:48]

[50] Admur 167:9 regarding “Tenu Leploni Lechol” and “Tenu Machal Lebiheima” that “since it is for the need of the meal even though it is not for the need of the bread of the blessing, it is not considered an interval”; Michaber 167:6; Rambam Brachos 1:8; Rav Sheishes 40a; Taz 167:7; M”A 167:17; Beis Yosef 167; M”B 167:37; Kaf Hachaim 167:47; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167 footnote 73

Does this apply by every blessing or just Hamotzi: Some Poskim suggest that the above lack of invalidation of meal related intervals only applies after the blessing of Hamotzi, however, by all other blessings if one spoke of matters pertaining to other foods of the meal or other matters of victim pertain to the fruit of the actual blessing, then it is considered an invalidating interval blessing and eating and a new blessing must be recited. [SSH”K 48 footnote 14 in name of Rav SZ”A; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167 footnote 73]

[51] Admur 167:9; Rama 167:6; Beis Yosef 167; Kol Bo 24; Kaf Hachaim 167:56

[52] See Admur 167:9 regarding switching rooms and the same should apply to talking

[53] See Kaf Hachaim 167:55; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 76-78

[54] Chazon Ish Dmaiy 15:5; Minchas Shlomo end of Sefer in Hashmatos; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 79-80

[55] Darkei Teshuvah Y.D. 19:47; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:10 footnotes 79-80

[56] Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 158:3; Biur Halacha 158:11 “Mivareich”; Igros Moshe O.C. 2:53; Piskeiy Teshuvos 158:26-27 footnote 135; Unlike Shaareiy Teshuvah 167:13 in name of Birkeiy Yosef 167:13 that he should first eat less then a Kezayis of bread and then  wash

[57] Admur 167:9; Michaber 167:6; Rambam Brachos 1:8

[58] Admur 167:9; Michaber 167:6; Rambam Brachos 1:8

[59] Olas Tamid 167:8; Elya Raba 167:9; P”M 167 A”A 18; Yifei Laleiv 167:11; Kaf Hachaim 167:49

[60] Admur 167:9; Michaber 167:6; Rav Sheishes 40a

[61] The reason: As this statement is for the need of the meal and is hence not considered an interval, as it is forbidden to eat prior to feeding one’s animals, as the verse [Devarim 11:5] states “Venasati Eisev Bisadecha Livhemtecha” and only afterwards it states “Veachalta Vesavata.” [Admur ibid; C.M. Hilchos Tzaar Baalei Chaim Kuntrus Achron 3 that it is Rabbinical; M”A 167:18; Tur 167; Brachos ibid; See Kaf Hachaim 167:50-56] Alternatively, the reason is because feeding one’s animals before one eats a meal is a Biblical obligation, and it is permitted for one to make an interval between the blessing and eating for the sake of a Biblical obligation. [M”A 271:12 in name of Ritzba]

[62] Kaf Hachaim 167:56

[63] Kaf Hachaim 167:48

[64] Or Zarua

[65] P”M 167 A”A 17; Pischei Olam 167:26; M”B 167:37

[66] Admur 167:9; Birchas Avraham p. 154; Elya Raba 178:5; Zechor Leavraham 60; Kaf Hachaim 178:21; See Admur 178:1 regarding Hefsek of switching areas while eating; Admur 8:21-22 regarding Hefsek of switching area between Mitzvos; Admur 166 regarding Hefsek of walking between washing and Hamotzi; Shaar Hatziyon 167:28 in name of Admur ibid; Birchas Habayis 1:14; Tehila Ledavid 166:3; M”B 178:39 in name of Birchas Avraham; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; Machsheves Chaim p. 135; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7; See regarding that walking in middle of a Mitzvah [in contrast to eating] is never a Hefsek: Admur 90:25; 104:2; Kuntrus Achron 8:5; 589:2; M”A 8:17

[67] The reason: As walking from one room to another is considered an interval. [Admur ibid]

[68] Tehila Ledavid 166:3

[69] Birchas Habayis 1:14; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7; See Tehila Ledavid 166:3; Some write based on him that that he may initially walk up to four cubits. [Rav Alyashvili]

[70] Implication of Admur 167:9; Birchas Avraham p. 154; Elya Raba 178:5; Zechor Leavraham 60; Kaf Hachaim 178:21; Tehila Ledavid 166:3; Birchas Habayis 1:14; 56:3; M”B 178:39 in name of Birchas Avraham; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 footnote 58; So rule regarding switching areas between two Mitzvos, such as between two Talleisim: Admur 8:22; Michaber 8:13; M”A 8:17; 166:3; Birchas Avraham 117; Shalmei Tzibur p. 32; M”B 8:5 in name of Admur and M”A ibid that Yeish Machmirim; See Kaf Hachaim 8:50

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that changing areas is never considered an interval, even if he went from inside to outside, unless he talked in-between. [Rama Y.D. 19:1 regarding Beis Hashehcita; Bach 8; Olas Tamid 8:17; Taz 8:11; Zera Emes 1:2; Chayeh Adam 12:5; M”B 8:34; Kaf Hachaim 8:50; Piskeiy Teshuvos 8:23-6 and 8:26 that so is the practical custom] The Poskim negate this opinion. [Michaber 8:13; M”A 8:17; Admur ibid; In Kuntrus Achron 8:5 Admur answers all the questions of the Taz and concludes “After answering all the questions of the Taz, certainly we rule like the Shulchan Aruch.”]

[71] So rule regarding speaking and the same should apply regarding switching rooms: Admur 167:10 and 18; Taz 167:8; M”A 167:19; Mordechai Pesachim 35a; Rosh Pesachim 10:5; Tosafus Pesachim 101a; See Hearos Ubiurim 765 p. 49

The reason: As the law regarding the person who hears the blessing should not be any less stringent than the law applicable to the person who said the blessing, and just as by the person who said the blessing we rule that if he speaks of unrelated matters between the blessing and eating that he must repeat the blessing being that he made an interval between the blessing and eating, so too, we apply this rule to one who spoke between his hearing of the blessing and his eating, as one who hears a blessing is like one who recited it himself. [Admur ibid; Taz 167:8; Beis Yosef 167; See Admur 104:5 regarding Shomeia Keoneh]

[72] Tehila Ledavid 166:3

[73] Admur 167:9

[74] See Admur 178:1; 8:21-22; Omitted from Shaar Hatziyon ibid; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 footnote 57

[75] Zechor Leavraham 60; Kaf Hachaim 178:21 [see there that if he took the food with him and had intent to eat it while walking then the blessing is not to repeated seemingly even if he went from inside to outside, however, based on Admur in Chapter 20 Halacha 1C it would seem that it must be repeated even in such a case]; See Chapter 20 Halacha 4 A and B

[76] Admur 167:9; Birchas Habayis 1:14; 56:3

[77] See Admur 185:3

[78] Contradiction in Admur: Vetzaruch Iyun as to how this does not contradict the ruling in Seder 9:4 and 167:6 in parentheses that one must repeat the blessing if it was said prior to the food being in front of him, and here in this case the food is in one room while he is reciting the blessing in a second room. However, perhaps one can explain that the case refers to a room with an open door in which case he can see his meal food, and it is hence considered as if it is in front of him. However, the question still remains as to why in this case we don’t simply tell the person to take the food with him into the next room as who is forcing him to specifically eat the food in the room with the feces and hence why is this considered a case of that it is not possible to do otherwise. Vetzaruch Iyun.

[79] See Admur 178:1; 8:21-22

[80] Seder 9:2; Luach 6:2; Admur 206:3; 8 Kuntrus Achron 5; Rama 206:3; M”A 206:4; Taz 206; Shibulei Haleket 166; Abudarham Brachos Shaar Rishon in name of Rabbeinu Gershon; Elya Raba 206:4; M”B 167:34; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:12; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; See Bava Kama 73b; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7-8

[81] Admur 206:3; M”A 206:4; Kneses Hagedola 206; Olas Tamid 206:3; Elya Raba 206:5; Chesed Lealafim 206:3; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 3; M”B 206:12; 487:4; 124:34 brings both opinions; Shaar Hatziyon 206:10; 487:2; Kaf Hachaim 167:44; 206:15; 582:9; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:9

Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that it contains four words “Shalom Aleichem Rebbe Mori.” [Beis Yosef 206 in name of Shivlei Haleket; Levush; Taz 206:3; P”M 487; M”B 267:9; 124:34 brings both opinions; See Kaf Hachaim 206:15 ]

[82] See Sdei Chemed Kelalim Taf Peas Hasadeh Mareches Hei; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:9

[83] M”A 167:3; 206:2; 296:4; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:15; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7

[84] See below; Accordingly, when eating two foods together and one of the foods is the main food, such as a cracker dipped in a dip then one is to make sure to first eat and chew on the main food. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 footnote 59]

One accidentally began eating the wrong food: If one began accidentally eating the wrong food after saying the blessing, then some Poskim rule that it is considered an interval which requires the blessing to be repeated. [Taz 212:6; P”M 212 M”Z 6] However, other Poskim rule that it is not considered an interval and one is to hence remove that food from his mouth and eat the food on which a blessing was said without repeating the blessing. [M”A 209:5; M”B 209:8] Practically, we rule that Safek Brachos Lihakel and hence a blessing is not to be repeated. [Birchas Habayis 1:15; See Daas Torah 167; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 and 206:8]

[85] See Darkei Teshuvah Y.D. 19:45; M”B 25:29; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:8

[86] Birchas Habayis 38:2; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:8

[87] Minchas Yitzchak 7:9; Shevet Halevi 5:16 based on M”A 124:14; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:8

[88] Betzel Hachochma 4:87; 5:107; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:8

[89] Seder ibid; Luach ibid; Admur ibid; M”A ibid; Beis Yosef 250 in name of Rada even if long time delay; Abudarham ibid; Elya Raba 206:4; Erech Hashulchan 206:3; P”M 206 A”A 4; Chayeh Adam 5:9; Kitzur SHU”A 50:5; Kaf Hachaim 167:44; 206:16

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if one delayed more than Kdei Dibbur, then the blessing is invalid. [Beis Yosef 206 in name of Shivlei Haleket; Perach Shushan; Kaf Hachaim 206:16]

[90] Beis Yosef ibid; Abudarham ibid; Kaf Hachaim ibid; Shulchan Hatahos 206:5; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:9

[91] Birchas Habayis 1:15; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 footnote 54

An action which takes much time and attention: Some Poskim rule that an action which takes much time and attention is considered an interval even Bedieved if they are not related the meal, and requires the blessing to be repeated, and it is only by actions of minimal attention that do not invalidate the blessing. [Birchas Habayis 1:17 in name of Tevuas Shur; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 54 and 65]

[92] Seder 9:2; Luach 6:2; Admur 206:3 and 167:3, 8-9; Bach 167; Elya Raba 202; Kitzur SHU”A 50:5; Kaf Hachaim 206:21; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:3

A large silent Hefsek: See Shaareiy Teshuvah and Elya Raba 202:1 who imply that whenever there will be a large Hefsek, then one is to first peel the fruit even though it will compromise its Shleimus and is Letzorech Achila.

[93] Seder ibid; Luach ibid; Admur 206:3 and 168:1; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf and Dinei Birchas Hanehnin Kelal 5:4; Elya Raba 202:1; See also Seder 10:6; Luach 3:6; M”A 211:1; Rambam Brachos 7:4; Brachos 39a

[94] Admur 167:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:

[95] Taz 167:4; M”B 167:79; Birchas Habayios 7:20; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:7 footnote 55

One’s wife: Some Poskim rule that it is permitted for the husband to cut his wife a slice of bread prior to eating it himself. [Birchas Habayios 7:20]

[96] Admur 206:15; Sefer Chassidim 111; 852; Elya Raba 202:1; Yifei Laleiv 3:116-17; Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; Kaf Hachaim 157:10; 170:82; 206:22; ; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:11; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 40:4; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:12 footnote 40

[97] The reason: It is not to be done after the blessing due to it being a belittlement of the blessing. [Admur ibid; M”A and Taz 296:2; Elya Raba 202:1; See also Admur 296:5]

[98] Admur 190:5 “If in front of the listeners there are empty cups, then he may pour a small amount of the wine of the Kos Shel Bracha into each and every one of their cups, after he completes reciting the blessing of Hagafen, prior to him drinking from it in order so the listeners drink from a cup that is not blemished. This applies also in the case that their cups already contain wine, but the wine is blemished, that he may pour it in order to fix their wine prior to him drinking from it”; Ketzos Hashulchan 46:11; M”B 182:23; 190:4; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 182:2; Regarding pouring into Pagum cups: Admur ibid and 271:29 “There is no requirement for the Mikadesh to pour from the wine in his cup to the cups of wine in front of the listeners which are fulfilling their obligation with hearing him make kiddush unless the wine in their cup is blemished, in which case he needs to pour his wine into each and every cup prior to him tasting it in order so they all drink from wine that is not blemished which is the Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar.”; Michaber 190:1; 182:4; 271:17; Tosafus Brachos 47a and Pesachim 106a; the Rashba Brachos 47a; Rosh Brachos 7:15 Pesachim 10:16; Bach 190; Taz 190:1; 182:4; Kaf Hachaim 184:24; Regarding pouring into empty cup for next day’s Kiddush: Admur 271:20; Michaber 271:11; Rabbeinu Yerucham 1 Nesiv 12

The Chabad custom: Rabbi Binyamin Klein, the Rebbe’s secretary, testified that he noticed that the Rebbe would follow this custom, as he would first pour the wine into a separate cup on behalf of his wife the Rebbetzin and only then drink from it himself. However, Rabbi Labele Groner states that the Rebbe would give her to drink directly from the cup. Perhaps both testimonies are accurate and the former was done by the Rebbe when there were guests by the table, while the latter was done he was eating alone with his wife [See Maaseh Melech in name of Rav Chesed Halbershtam likewise testifies to have witnessed both customs by the Rebbe]; Rabbi Eli Landau Shlita likewise testifies that the above was the custom followed in his father’s home when there were guests around and they could not give him from the actual cup, although when there was only family around then they would give from the actual cup.

Other opinions: Some Poskim write that the custom is not like this approach to have the Mivareich delay his drinking in order to first pour into the other cups. [Taz 182:4; P”M 182 M”Z 4 “seemingly the custom is that the Mivareich drinks the wine first”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 271:40 “Today this is no longer the custom to pour first for the participants”] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 182:2 footnote 12 who seems to understand from these Poskim that therefore it should not be done initially, and hence lists the option of pouring from the battle after the drinking as the first option and this option he only lists as the alternative. In Piskeiy Teshuvos 271 footnote 397 he writes that the reason that this custom is no longer followed is because we worry that the Mikadeish may speak in between. Vetzaruch Iyun

The advantage of this option: All the participants drink unblemished wine which was all use for the actual kiddush.

The disadvantage of this option: There is a delay for the Mikadesh until he drinks the wine. [However, since this delay is justified it is unclear if it is truly viewed as a Halachic disadvantage]

[99] The reason that this is not considered an interval: Distributing the wine at this time is not considered an interval between the blessing and the drinking being that it is being done for the need of the drinking of the listeners, as when he says the blessing it is as if they have said the blessed being that they fulfill their obligation with his blessing. [Admur 190:5; P”M 182 M”Z 4; See also Admur 271:20 “One should not make an interval between the blessing and the tasting for no reason,” which teaches us that an interval for spilling the wine is allowed to be done prior to drinking if it carries with it some halachic advantage] In other words, since the listeners are fulfilling their obligation together with the person saying the blessing, thus them drinking the wine first is just as justified as the person saying the blessing drinking the wine. Vetzaruch Iyun from Admur 167:20 in which he rules regarding Hamotzi that the pieces of bread should not be distributed until the person who said Hamotzi first eats from the bread as the distribution is considered an interval. Seemingly, however, one must say that in that case it is considered an interval being that the listeners lose nothing out from waiting [as well as that the custom is for them to say their own blessing when they receive the bread], in contrast to here that if the distribution is delayed until after he drinks from the wine, then their drinking will be blemished. Vetzaruch Iyun if this would apply even by the night Kiddush, in which there is a requirement to drink Malei Lugmav to be Yotzei, and hence while from the aspect of the blessing of Hagafen it would not be an interval, as they are all drinking the wine based on the blessing, perhaps it would be considered an interval to the blessing of Mikdesh Hashabbos in which they all need the person who made the kiddush to drink it in order for them to be Yotzei.

The reason it is not considered a shame for the blessing: See Admur 271:20 that pouring the wine after kiddush before tasting is considered a shame for the blessing, and hence is to be avoided if there is no need. In this case, however, one can argue that not only is it considered a case of need but that is not even considered a shame being that this wine is the wine that will be drunk by the listeners.

[100] Elya Raba 202:1; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf and Dinei Birchas Hanehnin Kelal 5:4; Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; Chesed Lealafim 206:3; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 3; M”B 206:12; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:8; Kaf Hachaim 206:22; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:8 footnote 63

[101] See Birchas Habayis 1:8; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:11

[102] See Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:9; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:14

[103] Kaf Hachaim 206:22; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:14

[104] Seder 9:1; Luach 6:1; Admur 167:9; M”A 167:16; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Kuf p. 81; Olas Tamid 167:11; Kaf Hachaim [Falagi] 23:7; Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 14; Kaf Hachaim 167:45; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7 footnote 24

[105] The reason: As the blessing recited is only on the swallowing of the food and not on the chewing as can be seen from the fact that one who chews and does not swallow does not need to recite a blessing. [Admur 167:9]

If he entered a Revius/Kezayis into his mouth: See Admur Seder 8:11 and Luach 8:12 that tasting a Revius or more requires a blessing even without swallowing. This implies that if he enters a Revius of food into his mouth and tastes it, then he may talk before swallowing. Vetzaruch Iyun!

[106] Admur 174:11; Michaber 170:1; 174:8; Rambam Brachos 7:6; Taanis 5b; Birkeiy Yosef 170:1; Aruch Hashulchan 170:1-2; Ketzos Hashulchan 39:2; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 24; Shemiras Hanefesh Kehilchasa 7:27; Piskeiy Teshuvos 170:1

[107] Admur 167:9; Kaf Hachaim 167:45; Shaar Hatziyon 167:28; Birchas Habayis 1:14 adds one should not walk even within the same room more than two Amos

The reason: As walking from one place to another is also considered an interval. [Admur ibid]

[108] M”B 167:35; See Admur in 168:7, Seder 8:10, Luach 2:11 that any amount of eating requires a blessing, and hence once any amount is swallowed there is no longer an interval involved.

[109] Seder ibid “It is questionable whether he must repeat the blessing”; Luach ibid; Admur 167:9 “It is possible that he must repeat the blessing”; M”A ibid; Shelah ibid; Olas Tamid ibid; M”B 167:35; See Hearos Ubiurim 794:56

The reason: As the blessing is only on the swallowing and not on the chewing, as one who chews and does not swallow does not need to say a blessing. [Admur 167:9; See also Seder 8:11, Luach 8:12 that “Benefit is considered the benefit of one’s stomach [i.e. swallowing]; second opinion in Michaber 210:2; Tosafus Brachos 14a in name of Rabbeinu Chananel in interpretation of Braisa “Tasting does not need a blessing”; Rosh 2:6 [see Beis Yosef] M”A 211:7 and 9-10 that this is the main opinion] Thus, if one speaks before swallowing it is as if he spoke between the blessing and eating, and another blessing is required. On the other hand, perhaps the chewing is considered the beginning of the eating and hence it is not considered an interval. [See Shaar Hatziyon 167:30; Halachos Ketanos 2:33; Admur 432:7 regarding talking in middle of Bedikas Chameitz] Likewise, perhaps swallowing is only required when one intends to merely taste the food, while by one who desires to eat the food then swallowing is not required. [Halachos Ketanos brought next]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the blessing is not required to be repeated, as tasting the food in one’s mouth suffices, and the only reason why by taste we exempt one who does not swallow is because his intent is to taste. [Halachos Ketanos 2:33; Leket Yosher p 39; Meiri Brachos 40a; Erech Hashulchan 167:3; Tal Oros p. 4; Mor Uketzia 210; Kol Gadol of Maharam Chaviv 10; Bigdei Yesha; Magen Giborim; Chayeh Adam 49, brought in M”B 167:35; See Yabia Omer 5:16] Other Poskim rule one is required to repeat the blessing. [Elya Raba, brought in Shaar Hatziyon 167:30; Beis Menucha 2, brought in Kaf Hachaim ibid]

[110] Ben Ish Chaiy Emor 14; Shaar Hatziyon 167:30; Kaf Hachaim 167:45; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 24

[111] Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 24, although concludes with Tzaruch Iyun as to why this option was omitted from the Poskim

[112] Admur 167:4; See Kaf Hachaim 167:15; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:14

[113] 1^st opinion in Admur ibid; 1^st opinion in Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; 1^st opinion in Rokeiach 329; Implication of Rama 167:1 who says one must distribute a Kezayis to each eater; M”A 167:7 learns from Rama that it is an obligation to eat a Kezayis and M”A concludes that one is initially to be stringent like this opinion; Bach 475; Olas Tamid 167:11; Arizal in Shaar Hamitzvos Parshas Eikev; Yifei Laleiv 167:2; M”B 167:35 concludes it is proper to follow this opinion; Vetzaruch Iyun if Admur learns this opinion to require a Kezayis in all situations, or only when eating with others.

[114] See Degul Merivava 167 and Kaf Hachaim 167:15 brought in coming footnotes; However, see Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid for other reasons why one should eat a Kezayis without interval which would apply to any eater

[115] Olas Tamid 167:11; Machatzis Hashekel 167:16 learns from a combination of rulings in M”A 167:7 and 167:16 that one is not to talk until he swallows a full Kezayis; M”B 167:35 concludes it is proper to follow this opinion not to talk until one swallows a Kezayis unless in a time of need; Kaf Hachaim 167:15 and 45

[116] The reason: As less than a Kezayis is not considered eating. [Olas Tamid 167:11; Kaf Hachaim 167:15] This opinion implies that Hamotzi may only be said over a Kezayis of bread, in clear contradiction to the ruling elsewhere [Admur 168:7 and 167:4; Seder 8:10 and Luach 2:11 regarding Bracha Rishona; Michaber 168:9; 210:1; Yerushalmi Brachos 7:1; Rambam Brachos 3:12] that Hamotzi may be said on any amount. The Degul Merivava 167 addresses this question and states that the intent of this ruling is not to say that perhaps only a Kezayis requires a blessing of Hamotzi, but rather that perhaps in order for the blessing of Hamotzi to cover an entire meal, one must eat a Kezayis of bread. On this the Machatzis Hashekel ibid states that it must initially be eaten without interval. Thus, the above ruling of the stringent opinion is only relevant when eating a meal, and not if one simply wants to taste a piece of bread. [So concludes Degul Merivava ibid; Shulchan Hatahor 167:4 and 177:1; Kaf Hachaim 167:15] However, Admur ibid implies that a) the entire discussion of Rama 167:1 is only regarding laws of Derech Eretz and not Brachos, and hence one is to eat a Kezayis simultaneously due to Derech Eretz and b) This law only applies when eating with others. Vetzaruch Iyun! See Ashel Avraham Butchach 167 that the reason is in order to approximate the blessing of Netilas Yadayim to the Kezayis

[117] 2^nd opinion in Admur ibid; 2^nd opinion in Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; 2^nd opinion in Rokeiach 329, brought in Beis Yosef 167; Opinion in M”A ibid and that so is the custom [however he personally concludes to be stringent]

[118] The reason: As Hamotzi may be said on any amount of bread. [Admur ibid]

[119] Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 22 that so is implied from Admur. This is implied from Admur 176:4 who rules the custom is like the 2^nd opinion and from Admur 167:9 who omits this ruling of the M”A

[120] Machatzis Hashekel 167:16; M”B 167:35 concludes it is proper to follow this opinion not to talk until one swallows a Kezayis unless in a time of need; Kaf Hachaim 167:15 and 45

[121] See Birchas Habayis Shaar 1:10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:12

[122] Admur 167:9; Seder 9:1; Luach 6:1; M”A 167:16; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Kuf; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7; If however he initially had in mind to simply taste the food and spit it out after saying the blessing then it is a blessing in vain according to all. [Seder 8:11, Luach 8:12; Michaber 210:2; M”A 211:7; Tosafus Brachos 14a in name of Rabbeinu Chananel in interpretation of Braisa “Tasting does not need a blessing”; Rosh 2:6]

If he entered a Revius:Kezayis into his mouth: See Admur Seder 8:11 and Luach 8:12 that tasting a Revius or more requires a blessing even without swallowing. This implies that if he entered a Revius of food into his mouth and tasted it, then he may talk before swallowing. Vetzaruch Iyun!

[123] Bach end of 206; Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; M”B 296:3; See Kaf Hachaim Yoreh Deah 89:6 regarding if said blessing on milk within six hours of meat; Admur 299:3 regarding if said blessing

[124] See Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1

The reason: As one who eats spoiled food transgresses Bal Teshaktzu, which is Biblical according to some opinions. [Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1] Alternatively, spoiled food that is inedible does not receive a blessing [Admur 204:2; Seder 7:22; Ketzos Hashulchan 50:2], and hence even if he were to swallow it, it would still be a blessing in vain.

[125] Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1

[126] Levushei Mordechai Kama 29; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:13 footnote 94

The reason: As this may possibly cause the blessing to be in vain, as explained above.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one may stop to answer Kaddish or Kedusha prior to swallowing the food, as in such a case one may rely on the lenient opinions. [Birchas Habayis 1:15; Yabia Omer 5:16]

[127] Yabia Omer 5:16; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:13 footnote 94

[128] See Admur 167:9; 168:7, Seder 8:10-11, Luach 2:11; 8:12; Michaber 210:2; Gemara Brachos 14a; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:5

Background: The Gemara Brachos 14a states “Tasting does not need a blessing…. up until a Revius.” The Rishonim dispute the definition of the word taste; does it refer to an amount of food, and hence any amount of food that is less than a Revius never receives a blessing when intending to taste [Rif and Rambam Brachos 1] or does it refer to swallowing versus spitting out and whenever one spits out a food, a blessing is not required, and whenever one swallows a food, a blessing is required. [Tosafus Brachos 14a in name of Rabbeinu Chananel] Admur rules like the stringency of both opinions, that swallowing always requires a blessing, and tasting [spitting out] a Revius or more always requires a blessing. This follows the ruling of the M”A 210:10 who rules the main opinion is swallowing is not tasting, and follows those who hold that whenever one tastes a Revius or more a blessing is required.

[129] Admur Seder 8:11 and Luach 8:12; P”M 210 A”A 8; Kaf Hachaim 210:27; See M”A 210:6 based on Rashi Brachos 14a

[130] Admur in 168:7, Seder 8:10, Luach 2:11 that any amount of eating requires a blessing; Admur 167:9, Seder 8:11, Luach 8:12 that “Benefit is considered the benefit of one’s stomach [i.e. swallowing] and only if he spits out the food he tastes is a blessing not recited”; second opinion in Michaber 210:2; Tosafus Brachos 14a in name of Rabbeinu Chananel in interpretation of Braisa “Tasting does not need a blessing”; Rosh 2:6 [see Beis Yosef]; M”A 211:7 and 10 that this is the main opinion

The reason: As it is forbidden to benefit from this world any amount without saying a blessing. [Admur 168:7, Seder and Luach ibid]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a blessing is never recited upon tasting less than a Revius of a food, even if one swallows it. If, however one tastes a Revius of the food, a blessing is recited [See coming footnotes for dispute if this applies even if he does not swallow it]. [1^st opinion in Michaber ibid; Tur 210 in his Stam:main opinion; Implication of Rif and Rambam Brachos 1 in interpretation of Braisa Brachos 14a “Tasting does not need a blessing, up until a Revius”; Beis Yosef 210 that we follow Rif/Rambam as well as Safek Brachos Lihakel; Rama ibid concludes that Safek Brachos Lihakel. This means that a blessing is not to be recited upon tasting a food unless one a) swallows the food as requires second opinion and b) eats a Revius as requires the first opinion. [Ateres Zekeinim 210 in explanation of Rama ibid; M”B 210:35] Many Poskim conclude like the Rama ibid. [Beis Yosef 210; Elya Raba 210:5; Mamar Mordechai 210:14; M”B ibid; Kaf Hachaim 210:31] and hence when swallowing less than a Revius one is to intent to do so for eating purposes in order to say a blessing [M”B ibid in name of Chayeh Adam; Kaf Hachaim 210:22; Piskeiy Teshuvos 210:9] or is to think of the blessing in his heart. [Kaf Hachaim 210:22]

If one tastes the food for purposes of eating: If one tastes and swallows the food for the purpose of eating and not for tasting purposes, a blessing must be recited according to all opinion even if the amount is less than a Revius. [M”A 210:6 as brought in Michaber 210:1] It is however disputed as to the definition of tasting for the purpose of eating. According to Rashi Brachos 14a this means that any taste which is not for the sake of adding spices, such as simply to see if the food is tasty, requires a blessing. However, according to the Rokeiach 209, even in such a case a blessing is not required so long as he desires to eat more and stops himself, and only an eating which one does not desire to eat more requires a blessing by less than a Revius. [M”A ibid; see Machatzis Hashekel] Practically, we rule like the Rokeiach ibid that tasting to see the taste is still considered tasting. [M”B 210:13 in name of Elya Raba and P”M]

[131] Seder and Luach ibid “taste”; Admur 167:9 “One who chews but does not swallow”

[132] Admur Seder 8:11 and Luach 8:12; M”A 210:6 based on Rashi Brachos 14a

Initially tasting a food to see if it needs salt or spices: See Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1 that one should not initially taste a food without a blessings to see how much salt or other species it needs, as he may come to swallow it.

[133] Admur Seder 8:11 and Luach 8:12; Rokeiach 209, brought in M”A ibid

[134] Bach 210; Elya Raba 210:4; Erech Hashulchan 210:6; Mamar Mordechai 210:14; P”M 210 A”A 9; M”B 210:14; Kaf Hachaim 210:24

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule one may say a blessing if he chooses, and the blessing in this case is voluntary. [Implication of wording in Tur; Kneses Hagedola, brought in Kaf Hachaim ibid]

[135] Olas Tamid 210:6; Elya Raba 210:3; P”M 210 A”A 6; M”B 210:14; Kaf Hachaim 210:26

[136] Seder 8:11; Luach 2:12; This follows both the 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid that only tasting a Revius or more requires a blessing and follows the 2^nd opinion in Michaber 210:2 that spitting out never requires a blessing. [Thus, everyone agrees that tasting less than a Revius which one will not swallow does not receive a blessing.]

The reason: As benefit is considered the benefit of one’s stomach [i.e. swallowing] and not just the benefit of one’s mouth. [Seder and Luach ibid; See also regarding not making a Hefsek between eating and swallowing: Admur 167:9; Seder 9:1; Luach 6:1; M”A 167:16; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Kuf; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:7]

[137] See M”A 210:7

[138] Seder 8:11 “Even if he tastes a lot, up until a Revius, not including a Revius”; Ohel Moed Shaar Brachos 1:4 brought in Beis Yosef 210

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that up until a Revius, including a Revius is still considered a taste. [M”B 210:14 in name of Rosh; Nehar Shalom]

[139] Olas Tamid 210:6; Elya Raba 210:3; P”M 210 A”A 6; M”B 210:14; Kaf Hachaim 210:26

[140] Admur Seder 8:11 “Even if he tastes a lot, up until a Revius, not including a Revius” and Luach 8:12 “Even if he tastes a lot, up until a Revius”; Ohel Moed Shaar Brachos 1:4 brought in Beis Yosef 210; Interpretation of Braisa Brachos 14a “Tasting does not need a blessing, up until a Revius”; Semag, brought in Erech Hashulchan 210:7 and Kaf Hachaim 210:30; This possibly follows the 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid and Tur 210 in his Stam/main opinion and the Rif and Rambam Brachos 1, as they can be interpreted to be referring even to spitting out a Revius that a blessing is required, and so learns Ateres Zekeinim 210, however see Beis Yosef 210 brought in other opinions

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a blessing is never recited upon tasting a food without swallowing it, even if it is more than a Revius of food. [2nd opinion in Michaber ibid; Tosafus in name of Rabbeinu Chananel; M”A 211:7 and 10 that this is the main opinion; Rama ibid concludes that Safek Brachos Lihakel. This means that a blessing is not to be recited upon tasting a food unless one a) swallow the food as requires second opinion and b) eats a Revius as requires the first opinion. [Ateres Zekeinim 210 in explanation of Rama ibid] Some Poskim rule that even according to the 1^st opinion in Michaber ibid and Tur 210 in his Stam:main opinion and the Rif and Rambam Brachos 1 a blessing is never said unless one swallows, even if he tastes a Revius, and they only argue if one swallows less than a Revius. [Beis Yosef 210 in argument against Ohel Moed ibid; M”B 210:15] According to this approach, everyone agrees that spitting out never requires a blessing and swallowing a Revius or more requires a blessing and the argument is only by swallowing less than a Revius. Admur, Ateres Zekeinim, Ohel Moed, and Erech Hashulchan ibid do not learn this way and rather learn that according to the first [and perhaps even second] opinion a Revius or more always requires a blessing.

[141] Beir Moshe 2:12; Kinyan Torah 5:17; Yabia Omer 7:33; Piskeiy Teshuvos 202:34

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a blessing is not recited upon chewing gum. [Yaskil Avdi 8:7]

[142] The reason: As one benefits from its taste and swallows this taste into his stomach, hence receiving benefit of both the mouth and abdomen. [See Chayeh Adam 49:4]

[143] Admur Seder and Luach ibid

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a blessing is never recited when chewing and spitting out for a child. [All other opinions in previous footnotes; M”B 210:18]

[144] See Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1

[145] See Admur 475:25 regarding Matzah “One who swallowed Matzah and did not chew it fulfills his obligation as since his throat received benefit, it is considered eating.”; Rav Elyashvili in Seder Birchas Hanhenin 8 footnote 72

[146] See Admur Seder 7:7 regarding water that no blessing is said unless one is thirsty; Admur Seder 7:8 that a blessing is only said over medicine if it tastes good; Admur Seder 8:11, Luach 8:12 “That tasting alone is not considered benefit” hence implying there must also be taste and swallowing, and taste without swallowing, or swallowing without benefit of taste, does not render a need for a blessing.

[147] Seder Birchas Hanehnin 7:8; Luach:10:8; Admur 204:14 and 15; Michaber 204:8; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:6 *Source sheets

[148] As if they are swallowed the mouth does not benefit and thus no blessing is made. [So is implied from the repetition of Michaber:Admur that “and the mouth benefits”, and so rules Piskeiy Teshuvos 204:18

[149] The reason: As although one is only eating them due to health reasons, and is thus forced into eating them, nevertheless since now while sick he desires this food so it heal him, he must thank G-d for his pleasure that he receives while eating it. [Admur 204:15]

[150] Admur 204:14 and Luach 10:8 and Seder 7:8 in parentheses in name of Yeish Mi Sheomer or Yeish Mi Sheratza Lomar

[151] Piskeiy Teshuvos 204:16

[152] Admur 196:1 [regarding Meizid]; 5; 204:15; Seder Birchas Hanehnin 7:9: Michaber 204:9; Piskei Dinim Tzemach Tzedek 7a; Piskeiy Teshuvos 196:1 *Source sheets

[153] Piskei Dinim Tzemach Tzedek 7a

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if the nonkosher food was eaten without prior knowledge that it is forbidden, then an after blessing is recited. [Admur 196:1]

[154] Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 196; Aruch Hashulchan 196:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[155] Seder 7:9; Luach 10:9; Admur 196:5; 204:15; Michaber 196:4 and 204:9; Beis Yosef 204; M”A 204:21; See Piskei Dinim Tzemach Tzedek 7:1; Igeres Hakodesh 26 [it becomes Heter Gamur]; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:7; Likkutei Sichos 3:985 [causes damage to soul]; 19:35

[156] See Michaber 202:4; Seder 7:9; Luach 10:9; Admur 196:5; 204:15; Maharam Shick O.C. 260; Piskeiy Teshuvos 196:1 and footnote 13; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] Mavo Chapter 10 *Source sheets

[157] Seder 7:9 and Luach 10:9 regarding Yom Kippur and Issur food; Admur 618:18 regarding Birchas Hamazon; 196:5 regarding an Issur food and that this applies according to all; 204:15 regarding Yom Kippur and Issur food; Michaber 196:4 and 204:9 regarding Issur; Tur 618 regarding Yom Kippur; M”A 204:21; M”B 604:46; All the following Rishonim regarding Yom Kippur: Maharam Merothenberg 71; Tashbeitz 565; Hagahos Maimanis Brachos 2:2; Rosh, brought in Beis Yosef 618 and Taz 618:1 regarding Birchas Hamazon; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:7

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one does not recite a before or after blessing upon eating an Issur even in a case of fatal illness. [Dispute recorded in Taz 618:10; Panim Meiros 2:6, brought in Shaareiy Teshuvah 196:2]

[158] Admur 618:18

[159] The reason: One who eats a forbidden food in a case of danger is required to say a before and after blessing over the food as he in truth is eating permitted [food], as he is doing a Mitzvah to save his life. [Admur 196:5; See Piskei Dinim Tzemach Tzedek 7:1; Likkutei Sichos 3:985; 19:35] The same applies for a sick person who eats on Yom Kippur. A blessing is needed before and after as he has nevertheless benefited from the food despite the fact that he has benefited against his will, and under the duress of his illness. [Admur 204:15]

[160] See Admur 196:2-4 regarding stolen bread and the same applies to any other stolen food; 11:12; Kutzur Achron 11:4; 649:6; Hilchos Geneiva Ugezeila Halacha 6; M”A 196:1; Bach 196 and Shut 1; Beis Yosef 196; Olas Tamid 196:1; Rabbeinu Yona on Yerushalmi Chalah 1:5; Rabbeinu Manoach Brachos 1:19; Tehila Ledavid 196:1

[161] The reason: The robber himself may never say a before blessing upon eating the stolen food, even if ownership has changed and has now entered his possession as a result of Yiush, being that he is obligated to return it to the original owner as part of his Mitzvah to return the stolen object and he cannot exempt himself with giving money to the owner. Accordingly, it is found that when he eats the food he’s transgressing a prohibition and therefore may not recite the blessing, as a blessing over a prohibition is not a blessing but a blasphemy. [Admur ibid]

[162] The reason: As once the food is eaten by him it now fully belongs to him in a way that it can no longer be returned and rather he must now pay money to the other in exchange for the food. He is therefore obligated to say an after blessing over the food being that the food was considered his. Now, although the original eating of the food was done in prohibition nonetheless, since after the eating he can exempt himself with money, hence making the food be considered his, therefore his blessing is not considered a blasphemy. [Admur ibid]

[163] 2^nd opinion in Admur 196:3 and conclusion there in parentheses that Safek Brachos Lihakel; Beis Yosef 196, brought in M”A ibid

The reason: As it is considered blasphemy to recite a blessing over a food that one retrieved through a sin.

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if the food has gone through a change, then the robber is obligated to recite also a before blessing upon eating it. The reason for this is because once the food has gone through a change, it now enters the robbers possession and is no longer than required to returned to the original owner, as the robber can choose to compensate him with money in exchange. Accordingly, his eating is not considered sinful. Now, although we rule regarding Mitzvah’s that a blessing may never be said over a stolen object even if it has gone through a change, nonetheless, one cannot compare the laws of blessings over pleasures to the laws of blessings over Mitzvahs. [1^st and Stam opinion in Admur ibid; Maggid Mishneh Chametz 6; Bach ibid; Olas Tamid ibid; M”A ibid; Nehar Shalom 196:1]

[164] Admur 196:4

[165] Admur 196:3 regarding baking stolen wheat or grain into bread

[166] Admur 204:15

[167] This applies even according to the first opinion in the next footnote. [Admur ibid]

[168] Some Poskim rule that whenever one receives pleasure from the food, then even if he is being forcibly fed by robbers, nonetheless a blessing must be recited, and it is only if he has no enjoyment at all from the food that a blessing is not recited. [First opinion in Admur ibid; M”A 204:20 in opinion of Michaber; Taz 204:12 ] Other Poskim however rule that a blessing is only to be recited if one currently desires to eat the food even if it is due to an external reason, such as for medicinal purposes. In such a case, since he both receives pleasure from the food and desires to eat it, therefore a blessing must be recited even though he does not intrinsically want to eat the food right now for food purposes. However, when one is being physically forced to eat a food that he does not want to eat for any reason, then even if he against his will receives enjoyment from its taste, a blessing is not warranted. The reason for this is because how can one bless G-d for creating this food or drink when he has no desire at all right now to consume it, and from his perspective it would’ve been better that this food was not created or made available at the moment, which would stop him from being force-fed.

[169] Admur ibid in parentheses

[170] Admur 197:9; See also 204:15; 476:5; 612:5

[171] Seder 7:2; Admur 204:2; Ketzos Hashulchan 50:2; Piskeiy Teshuvos 204:5

[172] Michaber Y.D. 116:6; See Kaf Hachaim 116:66-78; Kitzur SHU”A 33:9; See Rambam Deios 4:9; Kitzur SHU”A 32:14

[173] See Admur 197:9; 204:15; 476:5; 612:5 for a number of cases in which no blessing is said on regularly edible food being that he personally does not desire to eat it, and receives no pleasure from it, as to him the food is repulsive at this moment

[174] See Admur Seder 9:4; Luach 6:4; Admur 167:6 in parentheses; 206:9; Michaber 206:5; Rambam Brachos 4:10; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:4; 56:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:17

[175] The law if it is present inside of a box: Some Poskim suggest that if the food is in front of him inside of a box and the like, then he does not have to repeat the blessing. [P”M 206; M”B 206:19; Ketzos Hashulchan 56 footnote 1] This seemingly follows the same ruling as Admur Kuntrus Achron 271:8 that in the event that one had intent on the food at the time that he said the blessing, then the blessing is valid even if it was not in front of it. However, according to the final ruling of Admur in Seder and Luach that the blessing is invalid even if he had it in mind, seemingly this ruling above the P”M would also be negated. However, see Ketzos Hashulchan 56 footnote 1 who records this ruling of the M”B without dissent.

[176] If the food was brought in middle of the blessing: See Ketzos Hashulchan 56 footnote 1 for a discussion on whether the invalidation of the blessing is specifically when he finished the blessing prior to the food being brought to him, and it was only brought to him after Kdei Dibbur of finishing the blessing, or even if he simply began saying the blessing without the food being there, even if the food arrived in middle of the blessing, nonetheless it remains invalid and the blessing must. Practically, if one has yet to say Hashem’s name in the blessing then seemingly the blessing counts, however if he already said Hashem’s name than this matter is under question, and practically, Safek Barchos Lihakel.

[177] Seder ibid; Luach ibid; Admur 206:9 [unlike Admur KU”A 271:8]; M”A 206:7; Levush 206:5

Contradiction and Other rulings in Admur: Elsewhere, Admur rules that in the event that one had intent on the food at the time that he said the blessing, then the blessing is valid even if the food was not in front of him at the time that he said the blessing and was only brought afterwards. [Admur Kuntrus Achron 271:8; Implication of scenario in Admur 167:9 regarding going from one room to another; Poskim brought in Tehila Ledavid 206:1, including Taz 271:8, M”A 271:31, Rabbeinu Tam] This is a direct contradiction to the ruling brought above. [See Tehila Ledavid 206:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 79:6] This ruling seems to follow the same ruling as those Poskim who rule that if the food is found inside of a box and he for sure will be able to eat it, than the blessing is valid. [See P”M 206; M”B 206:1] Practically however the main ruling of Admur follows his ruling in the Seder and Luach, as is known that this was written later on, and we always rule like the Siddur over the Shulchan Aruch.

[178] P”M 206; M”B 206:19

[179] See Admur Seder 9:4; 167:7; 206:8; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:4

[180] So rule regarding bread and the same applies by all foods: Admur 167:6; Michaber 167:3; Rokeiach 329; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:6; 55:4

[181] The reason: As one may only recite a blessing over a Mitzvah in close approximation to the Mitzvah, when the Mitzvah is prepared in his hand for him to fulfill it and not prior, as explained in 25:17. [Admur ibid; M”A 167:9]

[182] Admur 167:6 in parentheses; 206:9 regarding all foods; Seder 9:4 regarding all matters that a blessing is said over

[183] Seder ibid

[184] Admur Seder 9:4; 206:8; 167:7; Michaber 206:4; Brachos 43b; Besi Yosef 212; Mordechai in name of Ravayah; Ataz 167:6

[185] The reason: As all matters which one says a blessing over must be held in the right hand during the time of the blessing. [ibid] This is due to the importance that the Torah gives the right hand. [M”B 206:18; Levush 297:5; See Admur 183:7; Tzemach Tzedek ibid] Alternatively, it is due to the fact that the right hand represents Chesed and life. [Seder Brachos “Lechoz”, brought in Admur 206:8 regarding holding it with a knife; Elya Raba 206:6; Peri Megadim 206 A”A 6; All Poskim in next footnote who hold a lefty is to hold it in his left hand]

[186] See Sefer Dinei Iter p. 182; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:15

Opinion of Admur: Admur ibid omits writing the reason of the Seder Brachos regarding why the right is to be preceded, thus implying like those Poskim who rule that the right is preceded due to its importance, and hence by a lefty, he is to hold it in his left hand. See Dinei Iter ibid and footnotes below.

[187] Implication of reason of Seder Brachos “Lechoz”; Elya Raba 206:6 based on Seder Brachos ibid; Peri Megadim 206 A”A 6 leaves this matter in question; Sdei Chemed Brachos 1; Kaf Hachaim 206:30 that so is custom; Orchos Chaim 206:5 in name of Divrei Mordechai 15; See also P”M 158 A”A 1; M”B 4:22 in name of Artzos Hachaim; Amudei Hashulchan 2:2; Kaf Hachaim 4:35; Miasef Lekol Hamachanos 4:53; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:15

[188] The reason: As the main reason for holding it in one’s right hand is due to the right representing life and kindness, which is applicable even to the right hand of a lefty. [Poskim ibid]

[189] M”B 206:18 that so is implied from M”A 183 and Rav Akiva Eiger 206; Mur Veahalos 48; Beir Moshe 1:3; Rivivos Ephraim 8:80; Cheishev Haeiphod 3:30; Sefer Dinei Iter p. 182 and 43-46 based on Tzemach Tzedek Orach Chaim 4:6 and 5:8 regarding Netilas Yadayim, and based on Admur 183:7 that a lefty is to hold the Kos Shel Bracha in his left hand; 651:14 that a lefty is to hold the Lulav in his left hand; So writes also Rav Ginzberg in Haaros Ubiurim 783 p. 74

[190] The reason: As the main reason for holding it in one’s right hand is due to the respect one is required to show to his more distinguished hand, which for a lefty is his left hand. [Poskim ibid]

[191] Admur 206:8 “Yeish Mi Sheomer”; Seder 9:4 “Tov Lizaher”; M”A 206:6; Elya Raba 206:6;

[192] M”A 167:10 “If he has a Beis Yad, he must remove it”; Hagahos Maimanis Brachos Mahraham Merothenberg 23 in name of Sefer Hachasid; Ketzos Hashulchan

[193] See Seder 9:2; 10:1 and 6; Luach 3:1 and 6:2; Admur 167:3; 168:1; 206:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:3; 55:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:13

[194] Seder 9:2; 10:6; Luach 3:6; M”A 211:1; Rambam Brachos 7:4; Brachos 39a; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf and Dinei Birchas Hanehnin Kelal 5:4; Elya Raba 202:1; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 197b; Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; Elya Raba 202:1

[195] Vetzaruch Iyun why Admur does not write to cut part of the fruit partially, just like Admur 167:3 rules regarding bread! What’s the difference? Likewise, Admur 206:8 implies there is no issue with stabbing the fruit prior to the blessing.

[196] Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:13 footnote 45

[197] See Admur 167:3

[198] Seder 9:2; Luach 6:2; Admur 206:3; M”A 205:4; Bach 206; Elya Raba 202:1; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf and Dinei Birchas Hanehnin Kelal 5:4; Sefer Chassidim 849; See Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1

[199] Admur 167:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:

[200] Seder Birchas Hanehnin 10:3; Luach Birchas Hanhenin 3:3; Admur 168:5; 167:3 [regarding not cutting from half a loaf until after blessing]; Michaber 168:2 and 4; Tur 168; Implication of Brachos 39b; M”A 167:4; 168:7; Mordechai Remez 129 in name of Maharam; Tosafus Brachos ibid; Rosh 6:21; Hagahos Maimanis Brachos 7:4; M”B 167:5

[201] Tehila Ledavid 167:4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:11 footnote 37

[202] Tehila Ledavid 167:4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:11 footnote 37

[203] So explicitly rules Admur 167:3 “However by a thin cake even during the week one does not need to cut it at all prior to the blessing as the year is no delay between the breaking off of a piece after the blessing.”

[204] Implication of Poskim ibid that only by a nut should it be broken before ethe blessing to check if it has worms; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf and Dinei Birchas Hanehnin Kelal 5:4; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 197b; Shaareiy Teshuvah 202:1; Elya Raba 202:1; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:13 footnote 42-44; Rav Alyashvili Seder 9 footnote 18

[205] Implication of all Poskim ibid; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid;  Rav Alyashvili ibid

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that even in this case one is to first peel the fruit and then say the blessing. [See Shaareiy Teshuvah and Elya Raba ibid who imply that whenever there will be a large Hefsek, then one is to be peel it first; Aruch Hashulchan 202:11; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 44 that so did Chasam Sofer]

[206] Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:13 footnote 45

[207] See Admur Seder 9:2, Luach 6:2, and 206:3 that one is to not cut a fruit until after the blessing, as it is a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to say the blessing on a whole food. Now, this is not considered a Hefsek as it is done for the sake of the eating

[208] Kitzur SHU”A 119:3

[209] See Otzer Minhagei Chabad p. 134

[210] Brachos 51a; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1 [44b]; Michaber 172:2 regarding one who forgot and began eating a food without a blessing; M”A 172:4; Taz 172:2; Ketzos Hashulchan 5:10 “It is forbidden to say a blessing with food in one’s mouth”; Beir Heiytiv 173:3; M”B 173:7

[211] See Ketzos Hashulchan 55:8-10

[212] Michaber 172:2; Tur 172:2; Brachos 50b; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1 [44b]; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:8

[213] Brachos 51a; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1 [44b]; Michaber 172:2 regarding one who forgot and began eating a food without a blessing; M”A 172:4; Taz 172:2; Ketzos Hashulchan 5:10 “It is forbidden to say a blessing with food in one’s mouth”; Beir Heiytiv 173:3; M”B 173:7

The reason: As the verse states “Yimalei Pi Tihilasecha” which means that one’s entire mouth must be involved in praising Hashem. [See Brachos ibid; M”A 172:4; Taz 172:2; Beir Heiytiv ibid; M”B ibid; Ketzos Hashulchan ibid; Kaf Hachaim 172:4]

[214] The reason: This is due to the prohibition against destroying food.

Does this apply according to all opinions: Some Poskim rule that according to the ruling of the Raavad regarding liquid that one is to spit it out if he has more liquid available, then the same applies here as well. [Toras Chaim Sofer 172] Other Poskim, however, rule that even the Ravaad agrees in this case that one is not to spit out the food and cause it to go to waste as the concept of Yimalei Pi Tehilasecha is not as severe as eating without a blessing. [Maharam Benet on Mordechai Brachos 7:53; Magen Giborim 172; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 172:4]

[215] See P”M 172 M”Z 2 in name of Rambam and M”B 172:6 “Such as beans and the like which are hard.”; Ketzos Hashulchan ibid

[216] M”B 172:8 “strawberries or grapes”

[217] Tur and Michaber 172:1; Brachos 50b

[218] Michaber ibid; Rama ibid; Tur ibid; Brachos ibid “By liquids one is to swallow it”; Rabbeinu Chananel, brought in Tur ibid and Rosh Brachos 33; Rosh Brachos 33; Rashba Brachos ibid in name of Raavad, brought in Beis Yosef 172; Leaning way of learning Rambam Brachos 8:12

[219] The reason: As it is not possible to place the liquid on the side of his mouth to allow a blessing to be said, and if he spits it out it will become repulsive. [See Brachos ibid] Alternatively, as once liquid is placed in the mouth it loses its food status as it is no longer fit for drinking. Accordingly, one is not to be particular to recite a blessing even if he could. [M”A 172:1; Rabbeinu Chananel ibid, brought in Rosh ibid; Kaf Hachaim 172:1]

Other Opinions: The Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1 rules that the liquid is to be spat out and not drunk without a blessing. Many Poskim and Mefarshim explain that in truth there is no dispute between the Bavli and Yerushalmi, and while the Bavli refers to a case that one has no more liquid available, the Yerushalmi refers to a case that there are more liquids available. [Raavad, brought in Rashba ibid and Beis Yosef ibid; Maareh Hapanim on Yerushalmi ibid; Amudei Yerushalmi ibid; Bach 172; M”A 172:1; Elya Raba 172:1]

[220] Michaber ibid; 1^st opinion in Tur ibid; Rabbeinu Chananel, brought in Tur ibid and Rosh Brachos 33, in his interpretation of Brachos ibid; Possible way of learning Rambam Brachos 8:12 [See Beis Yosef 172; Kaf Hachaim 172:3]

The reason: As we never say a before blessing after a food has been eaten. [Taz 172:1, as explained in 167:8] Alternatively, once the liquid is in one’s mouth it is no longer drinkable by most people and hence does not deserve a blessing. [M”A 172:1; Rabbeinu Chananel ibid, brought in Rosh ibid]

[221] Rama ibid “And so is the main opinion”; Darkei Moshe 172:1; 2^nd opinion in Tur ibid; Rosh Brachos 33; Rashba Brachos ibid in name of Raavad, brought in Beis Yosef 172; Leaning way of learning Rambam Brachos 8:12 [So learns Darkei Moshe ibid; See Beis Yosef 172]

[222] The reason: Although we do not say a blessing after a food has already been eaten, since in this case one remembered prior to the swallowing, it is similar to saying the blessing beforehand, even though it is only said after the swallowing, as he has no choice. [Taz 172:1; M”A 172:3; Rosh ibid; See Beis Yosef ibid]

[223] M”A 172:2 and 3; Bach 172; Elya Raba 172:1; Raavad, brought in Rashba ibid and Beis Yosef ibid, in explanation of Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1 “Liquids are to be spat out”; Ohel Moed 1:12; Maareh Hapanim on Yerushalmi ibid; Amudei Yerushalmi ibid; P”M 172 M”Z 2 regarding wine; M”B 172:2 “And so should be done” however in Biur Halacha 172 :1 “Vieino” he writes “One who is lenient in this is not to be protested”; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:9

[224] The reason: This is done to avoid the dispute between the above Poskim [M”A ibid] and is also done to avoid the dispute between the Bavli and Yerushalmi. [See Poskim ibid] Rebbe Akiva Eiger on M”A ibid who questions as to what dispute one will enter if he has more liquid in front of him and he thus must spit it out, as he can simply swallow it as agree all Poskim and then say a blessing and drink from the more liquid. This avoids the dispute according to all, and hence it is not understood why the M”A ibid directs one to spit it out.

[225] Derech Hachaim; Ketzos Hashulchan ibid based on Admur 185:1; See Maareh HaPanim on Yerushalmi ibid that most Poskim, Geonim and Rishonim argue on Rama, and Safek Brachos Lihakel, and hence one is to wallow it without saying any blessing. The Poskim in previous footnote rule that even if one does not have more liquid available, one should only swallow the liquid if he is in need of it. Otherwise, it is best to spit it out in order to avoid the dispute and not benefit from the world without a blessing. [Kaf Hachaim 172:1 and 3]

[226] P”M 172 M”Z 2; Derech Hachaim; Shulchan Hatahos 172:1; Kaf Hachaim 172:1;

[227] The reason: As since whatever one does will be under a dispute, it is better in this case to rely on the Rambam Brachos 1:7 who rules one is Yotsei even if he thinks a blessing in his mind. [Poskim ibid]

[228] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 172 footnote 18 who questions the above ruling of thinking the blessing, as by doing so one enters into a new dispute as to whether he may say a blessing on the remaining liquid. [See P”M 62 A”A 1; Chayeh Adam 5:16]

[229] If, however, one followed the Rama ibid and recited a before blessing after swallowing the liquid, then it is questionable if one should recite also an after blessing, as we do not find a before and after blessing said in approximation of each other. Practically, if one ate one of the foods of the 7 Minim an after blessing is to also be said, although if he drank water and other foods it is questionable. [M”A 172:3]

[230] M”A 172:2; Beis Yosef 172; Nanar Mordechai 172:1; P”M 172 A”A 1; Kaf Hachaim 172:2

[231] Admur 167:11; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:8 *Source sheets

[232] Admur 167:12 [regarding Hamotzi]; Michaber 167:9; 209:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:10; 55:10; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Brachos Vol. 4 p. 303; Piskeiy Teshuvos 209:6; See Chapter 3 Halacha 5??! *Source sheets

If one is almost certain that he did not say it: See Tzemach Tzedek O.C. 1:3-7 that according to Peri Chadash whenever the Safek is more tilted towards that he did not say the blessing then it may be said, however one may only rely on this regarding the blessings of Shemoneh Esrei

[233] The reason: As the general rule by Rabbinical commands is Safek Derabanun Lekula, and hence blessings which are Rabbinical would not be required to be repeated in a case of doubt. Furthermore, one is not even allowed to be stringent upon himself and say the blessing anyways, as blessings may only be recited when mandated by the sages, and hence if he were to say the blessing it would be a questionable blessing in vain. [Admur 167:12]

[234] See Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 24

[235] Admur Seder 1:5; Luach 1:5; Admur 202:24; M”A 202:36; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 25a; Brachos 35a; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:3

[236] Admur Seder 1:5; Luach 1:5; Admur 202:24; M”A 202:36; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 25a; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:3

[237] Seder 1:4-5; Luach 1:5; Admur 202:24; Michaber 204:13; Rama 202:18; M”A 202:36; Tur 202; Rosh 6:6; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 25a

[238] Such as rice [Seder 1:10] or fruit soup [Seder 7:12] or a fruit which has completely disintegrated [Seder 7:22-24], or soup from vegetables that have cooked in vinegar [Seder 7:21] or legume porridge that has been slightly cooked [Seder 7:24]

[239] Admur 202:24; Omitted from Seder and Luach ibid, despite Admur bringing this concept regarding rice in Seder 1:11!

[240] Seder 1:4; Luach 1:4-5; Admur 206:1; 202:24; Michaber 206:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2

[241] Such as fruit jam [Seder 6:4] or perennials [Seder 6:6]

[242] Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2

[243] Admur 202:24; Omitted from Seder and Luach ibid, despite Admur bringing this concept regarding rice in Seder 1:11!

[244] Seder 1:10 regarding rice

[245] Admur 168:12 according to all opinions

[246] The reason: The opinion who is stringent to invalidate the blessing of Mezonos by definite Hamotzi bread agrees that even initially one is to recite the blessing Mezonos by questionable Hamotzi bread such as Pas Haba Bekisnin, as Safek Brachos Lihakel and even initially there is no worry of a blessing in vain in such a case being that the sages were lenient to permit one to fulfill his obligation with this blessing. Furthermore, in truth the blessing of Mezonos ideally includes also bread and so long as it is not clear that a food has a definition of complete bread, we should not remove it from status that is included in the blessing of Mezonos. [See Admur 168:12 in great length]

[247] Admur 202:24; Omitted from Seder and Luach ibid, despite Admur bringing this concept regarding rice in Seder 1:11!

[248] See Seder 1:19; Seder 3:3; Luach 1:18; Admur 202:12; Ketzos Hashulchan 59 footnote 7

[249] See Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:2-5, 10, 16; 2:9;  6:4, 6; 7:22-24  Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2-5, 14; 10:11; SHU”A Admur 167:13; 168:12; 202:2, 10; 24; 206:1; Michaber 167:10; 204:13; 206:1; 208:15; M”A 209:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 39:37 footnote 24 and 34; 48 footnote 1; 49:2-3, 9, 18 footnote 1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:20-21; 206:1-7; 208:23; Koveitz Kieis Shasul [Belz] p. 217

[250] Mamar Murdechaiy 168:18; Chayeh Adam 58:1-2; Derech Hachaim Dinei Taus Alef; Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 56:1; Kaf Hachaim 158:43; Birchas Habayis 19:22; Even Haozer 168:5; Ketzos Hashulchan 48 footnote 1; Ritva Brachos 2:18; Igros Moshe Y.D. 3:120 -2 unlike Igros Moshe O.C. 2:54

Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that the blessing of Hamotzi never covers Mezonos, even by Pas Haba Bekisnin, and hence the blessing of Mezonos is still required to be recited. The proof is from the fact that regarding those breads which are disputed whether they are Hamotzi or Mezonos it is ruled that Mezonos is to be recited. This implies that if one were to recite Hamotzi then he would not fulfill his obligation according to the opinion which requires Mezonos to be said. [Elya Raba 168:20; Igros Moshe O.C. 2:54 unlike Igros Moshe Y.D. 3:120 -2]

[251] The reason: As these foods contain the same form as does bread and thus it does not appear that one is lying when saying the blessing. [Chayeh Adam ibid]

[252] Mamar Murdechaiy 168:18; Chayeh Adam 58:1-2 and Nishmas Adam 1; Derech Hachaim Dinei Taus Alef; Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 56:1; Kerem Shlomo 168:5; Ketzos Hashulchan 48 footnote 1; Kaf Hachaim 158:43

[253] The reason: As it appears like a clear lie to say “Hamotzi” over this food when in truth it has no resemblance of bread. [Chayeh Adam ibid]

[254] So rule regarding Hei Minei Dagan, and all the more so would this apply by all the above foods and blessings, Upashut: Mamar Murdechaiy 168:18; Chayeh Adam 58:1-2; Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 56:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 48 footnote 1; Kaf Hachaim 158:43; So rule regarding legume bread: Ritva Brachos 1:8; 2:17; Birkeiy Yosef 207:1 in Shiyurei Bracha, brought in Shaareiy Tehsuvah 207:1; So rule regarding fruits: M”A 209:1

[255] The reason: As it appears like a clear lie to say “Hamotzi” over this food when in truth it has no resemblance of bread. [Chayeh Adam ibid]

[256] Ritva Brachos 1:8; 2:17; Birkeiy Yosef 207:1 in Shiyurei Bracha, brought in Shaareiy Teshuvah 207:1

[257] See Admur Seder 1:3; 2:9; Admur 168:12; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 9:3; Igros Moshe O.C. 4:40; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21

[258] 1^st and Stam opinion in Seder 1:3; Taz 168:6; Ritva Brachos 42a; Meiri Brachos 35a; Derisha 168; Elya Raba 168:16; Even Heozer 168 Dinim Haolim 5; Biur Halacha 168:10 “Bemakom Birchas Hamotzi” that so rule many Achronim; Kaf Hachaim 167:75; Derech Hachaim Dinei Taus Bibrachos 1; Shaareiy Teshuvah 167:13; See Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 9c; 10b; 14b

[259] The reason: As in truth the blessing of Mezonos includes also complete bread and it is just that the sages established the more superior blessing of Hamotzi to be initially recited over bread being that bread goes through a change which makes it superior to other foods. [See Admur 168:12 regarding Safek bread, and the same argument can be made for definite bread, according to this opinion]

[260] 2^nd opinion in Seder 1:3; Only opinion in Luach 1:3; Only opinion in Admur 168:12 regarding complete bread; M”A 168:18; Bach 168; Teshuvas Beis Yehuda Ayash O.C. 41; Birkeiy Yosef 167:10; Nehar Shalom; Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger on Gemara Brachos 36b; Aruch Hashulchan 168:19; Birchas Habayis 7:15;

The law by Safek Hamotzi bread – Pas Haba Bekisnin: The above the above opinion is only stringent by definite Hamotzi bread, however, by questionable Hamotzi bread such as Pas Haba Bekisnin, they agree that even initially one is to recite the blessing Mezonos, as Safek Brachos Lihakel and even initially there is no worry of a blessing in vain in such a case being that the sages were lenient to permit one to fulfill his obligation with this blessing. Furthermore, in truth the blessing of Mezonos ideally includes also bread and so long as it is not clear that a food has a definition of complete bread, we should not remove it from status that is included in the blessing of Mezonos. [See Admur 168:12 in great length]

[261] The reason: As although in truth the blessing of Mezonos includes also complete bread nonetheless the sages established the more superior blessing of Hamotzi to be recited over bread being that bread goes through a change which makes it superior to other foods. [Admur 168:12]

[262] Conclusion of Admur in Seder ibid and Seder 2:9 [unlike his ruling in 168:12 and Luach 1:3;] Admur 168:12 regarding Safek bread [i.e. Pas Haba Bekisnin]; Shulchan Hatahor 168:11; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:10; Beir Moshe 4:21-4; Igros Moshe O.C. 4:40 although advises that to escape the dispute, one is to stop his meal, recite Birchas Hamazon and then wash and repeat Hamotzi; All Poskim in first opinion including M”B, Kaf Hachaim,

Other rulings of Admur: In his Shulchan Aruch 168:12 and Luach 1:3 Admur rules that one who recited the blessing of Mezonos on definite Hamotzi bread does not fulfill his obligation.

[263] Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 24 and 34 who gives this advice regarding this case and other cases of doubt, although he concludes with a Tzaruch Iyun as to why this workaround was not written in the Poskim [see M”B 176:12, Vetzaruch Iyun]; See Igros Moshe O.C. 4:40 who rules that to escape the dispute, one is to stop his meal, recite Birchas Hamazon and then wash and repeat Hamotzi; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21 that one should hear the blessing of Hamotzi or Mezonos from another person eating

[264] Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; Birchas Habayis 7:15; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 34; See Halacha 16!

[265] See Kaf Hachaim 202:9; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:3; Halacha Berura 206:7

[266] Setimas Kol Haposkim who only record that the blessing of Shehakol covers all foods Bedieved; Implication of Admur in Seder Admur 1:3 and Admur 168:12 that the dispute and discussion of Mezonos being Motzi another food is only by bread or Safek bread, and not by anything else; Implication of Admur in Seder 1:10 regarding rice that he does not suggest to say Mezonos and only suggests saying Shehakol; All Poskim who rule that one is not Yotzei Mezonos over bread being that only Shehakol is Motzi other foods and the same would certainly apply to other foods that one is not Yotzei: Teshuvas Beis Yehuda Ayash O.C. 41; Birkeiy Yosef 167:10; Nehar Shalom; Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger on Gemara Brachos 36b

[267] Aruch Hashulchan 167:19; So rule regarding all foods except wine and dates: Beis Oveid; Pesach Hadvir 202:12; Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1:36; Orchos Chaim 202:2; See Kaf Hachaim 202:9; So rules even regarding wine: Rashbatz Brachos 40b; So rule regarding almonds: Rav Akiva Eiger ibid

[268] So rule the following Poskim regarding Hamotzi and the same would apply regarding Mezonos: Ritva Brachos 1:8; 2:17; Birkeiy Yosef 207:1 in Shiyurei Bracha, brought in Shaareiy Teshuvah 207:1

[269] Rashbatz Brachos 40b; Igros Moshe C.M. 2:41

[270] All Poskim in next footnote; Beis Oveid; Pesach Hadvir 202:12; Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1:36; Orchos Chaim 202:2; Kaf Hachaim 202:9; 208:78; Beir Moshe 4:21-4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 208:23 footnote 174

[271] Implication of Derisha 168:2 and Taz 168:6; Elya Raba 168:16; Chayeh Adam 58:3 and Nishmas Adam 2 in name of Kesef Mishneh Brachos 4:6 “One can possibly say that if one said Mezonos on a cooked food and fruits that he is Yotzei,”; Biur Halacha 167:10 “Bemakom” and 208 “Ad Shenismaeich”; Shaar Hatziyon 167:11 and 208:31; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 13; Birchas Habayis Shaar 19; Kaf Hachaim 202:9 and 206:6; Kerem Shlomo 1:66; Halacha Berura 206:7

[272] Tehila Ledavid 1:48

[273] The reason: As all foods are considered Mazon as proven from the Talmudic ruling [Eiruvin 26] which states that one who vows not to eat Mazon is prohibited from eating anything except for water and salt. [Chayeh Adam ibid]

[274] Igros Moshe 4:40; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:3

[275] As stated from the previous footnotes, so is evident from the glaring omission of this possibility from all the laws of Safek brought in Admur, and so is evident from its omission from the Ketzos Hashulchan.

[276] P”M 214 M”Z 1; Minchas Shlomo 1:18; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:20-21; 213:1; See Kaf Hachaim 167:77 that if they did not have in mind to be Yotzei the mistaken blessing, and began to ignore it as soon as they heard it, then they are not Yotzei

[277] Beis Meir 167:6, brought in Kaf Hachaim 167:77; Kaf Hachaim 167:77 concludes that if they intended to be Yotzei even after hearing the mistaken words, then they are Yotzei

[278] Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:16; Luach 1:14; Michaber 208:15; Tur 208:15; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:9

[279] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Chita vol. 14 p. 543

[280] Kesef Mishneh Brachos 4:6 “Possibly even if one said Haeitz on bread he is Yotzei”; Tosafus Yerushalayim, and Amudei Hashulchan, brought in Kaf Hachaim 167:76

[281] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid

[282] The reason: This follows the opinion who rules that the tree from which Adam Harishon ate from was Haeitz. [Kesef Mishneh ibid; Kaf Hachaim ibid]

[283] All Poskim ibid who rule one is not Yotzei with Ha’adama, and certainly this would apply with Haeitz. Furthermore, possibly even those Poskim who ruled that one is Yotzei with Ha’adama, would agree that one is not Yotzei with Haeitz; See Chayeh Adam in Nishmas Adam 58:3 and Daas Torah who question the statement of the Kesef Mishneh ibid; Meiri Brachos 40a;

[284] See M”B 202:70; Kaf Hachaim 208:77; Piskeiy Teshuvos 208:23

[285] Admur 202:10; Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2 and 10:11 [Omitted from Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:2 and 6:9]; M”A 208:22; Panim Chadashos end of Hilchos Brachos; Shut Mahariy Levi Kelal 5:47; Halachos Ketzanos 2:179

[286] Gloss of Maharil on Admur 202:10 [regarding his ruling that if one said Haeitz on wine that he is not Yotzei] “In the Siddur Admur omitted this ruling and I am almost certain that I heard from Admur’s holy mouth that he retracted his ruling and ruled like the Even Haozer that he is Yotzei.”; Even Haozer 208:14; Reiah Brachos 35a; 40b; Ritva Brachos 35a; 40b; Shita Mekubetzes Brachos 35a; Ginas Veradim 1:19; Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 208:9 in name of Ginas Veradim; Panim Meiros 1:58; Rameh; Sefer Hapardes Shaar 0; Yad Efraim 202 in name of Halachos Ketanos; Birkeiy Yosef 207 and 202; Yosef Ometz 73:1; Ikarei Hadat 10:8; Beis Menucha 208:8; Sdei Chemed 1:2; Kaf Hachaim ibid; Ketzos Hashulchan 49 footnote 1; Toras Menachem on Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:1; See Tzemach Tzedek O.C. 26:4; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 7b; 10d

[287] M”B 208:70 and Shaar Hatziyon 208:66-67; Kitzur SHU”A 56:3; Kaf Hachaim 208:77

[288] Yad Efraim ibid; Kitzur SHU”A 56:3; See also Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; Birchas Habayis 7:15; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 34; See Halacha 16!

[289] Igros Moshe 4:40; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:3; 208:23

[290] Seder 1:4; Luach 1:4; Admur 206:1; Michaber 206:1; Mishneh Brachos 40a; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2

[291] Pashut, and is Kol Shekein from Ha’adama product that one is not Yotzei with Haeitz

[292] See Halachos Ketanos 1:9; Panim Meiros 1:95; Beir Heiytiv 202:19; Birchas Habayis 6:20

[293] See M”B 202:76; Biur Halacha 202; Kaf Hachaim 202:105; Shevet Halevi 10:41

[294] Chayeh Adam 51:9; M”B 203:3; Kaf Hachaim 203:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2; 18

[295] Biur Halacha 202:9 “Mivareich”

[296] See Rama 202:7; Michaber 202:8 and Kaf Hachaim 202:60 regarding date honey; Shaar Hatziyon 202:54; 205:21; Chazon Ish 33:5; Shevet Halevi 4:19; Az Nidbaru 7:57; Beir Moshe 2:12-4 [regarding tomato juice, plum juice, orange juice and other citrus fruit juices, apple sauce]; Piskeiy Teshuvos 202:16-23 footnote 129

[297] See Admur 202:2

[298] See M”A 206:1; Chayeh Adam 51:12; Derech Hachaim 9; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:2; M”B 202:23, 43; 206:3; Biur Halacha 202:9 “Mivareich”; Shaar Hatziyon 202:26 and 54; 205:21; Kaf Hachaim 206:3; Beir Moshe 2:12-4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:4

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one is not Yotzei if he says Haeitz on a product which is Shehakol or Ha’adama due to not being the main part of the fruit. [Even Haozer ; See Rav Akiva Eiger 202:7] Likewise, some Poskim rule that one is not Yotzei if he says Haeitz on a product which is Shehakol or Ha’adama due to degradation of the fruit, such as if it is better eaten raw then cooked or better eaten cooked than raw and it was eaten in its degraded state. [Shulchan Hatahor 206:2]

[299] See Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2-3; Shaareiy Teshuvah 167:13; Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; Kaf Hachaim 167:76; Birchas Habayis 19:20; Ketzos Hashulchan 37:10 and 49 footnote 1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21

Ruling of Admur: Admur in his Seder Birachas Hanehnin 1:3 records a dispute regarding one who recited Mezonos on Hamotzi bread and concludes Safek Brachos Lihakel, however, no mention is made in his Seder ibid regarding one who said Ha’adama on bread. However, in his earlier work called Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2-3 Admur ruled that he is not Yotzei if he said Ha’adama on either bread or Mezonos. Likewise, so can also be implied from his wording in Seder 1:4 that only Shehakol covers bread. Likewise, so is strongly evident from Seder 1:10 regarding rice that one is only Yotzei with a Ha’adama if the rice is whole, while if it is ground such as Mezonos rice bread, then one is not Yotzei with Ha’adama, and if Ha’adama is not valid for Mezonos, then certainly it is not valid for Hamotzi; On the other hand, in Admur 202:10 regarding if one said Haeitz on wine that he is not Yotzei there is a gloss which states that “I am almost certain that I heard from Admur’s holy mouth that he retracted his ruling and ruled like the Even Haozer 208:14 that he is Yotzei.” This would imply that he is likewise Yotzei if he said Ha’adama on Mezonos or bread. [See Ketzos Hashulchan 49 footnote 1] Likewise, possibly from his omission in Seder 1:3 of the case of Ha’adama, one can deduce that he retracted from his ruling in the Luach. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167 footnote 136] Vetzaruch Iyun.

[300] Admur in Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2 regarding bread and 1:3 regarding Mezonos [omitted from Seder 1:3]; Ketzos Hashulchan 49 footnote 1 that so is implied from Admur in Seder 1:4 and 1:10 [see previous footnote]; Reah, Ritva and Rabbeinu Asher Ben Chaim in Sefer Hapardes, brought in Birkeiy Yosef 167:5 in Shiyurei Bracha, Zechor Leavraham Mareches Tes, Shaareiy Teshuvah ibid; Birchas Habayis 19:20; P”M 208 M”Z 8 in implication of M”A; Aruch Hashulchan 168:19; 202:1; See Kaf Hachaim ibid; So rule regarding one who recited Mezonos on bread that he is not Yotzei, and seemingly the same would apply to one who said Ha’adama on bread or Mezonos that he is not Yotzei: Admur 168:12; Luach 1:3; 2^nd opinion in Seder 1:3; Bach 208; M”A 208:18; Teshuvas Beis Yehuda Ayash O.C. 41; Gloss of Rav Akiva Eiger on Brachos 36b; Aruch Hashulchan 167:19; Birchas Habayis 7:15

[301] Kesef Mishneh Brachos 4:6 “One can possibly say that if one said Ha’adama on bread that he is Yotzei, as it is indeed a fruit of the ground”; Rameh in Alfasi Zuta, brought in Birkeiy Yosef ibid and Shaareiy Teshuvah ibid; Orchos Chaim in name of Rishonim; Possible understanding of retracted ruling of Admur brought in gloss on Admur 202:10, and from his omission in Seder 1:3 [see previous footnotes]; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek Brachos 9-14 “If one said Ha’adama on bread of the five grains [i.e. Hamotzi] there is no doubt, and certainly one fulfills his obligation Bedieved just like Shehakol”; Nishmas Adam 58:1; Panim Meiros 1:58; Erech Hashulchan 167:6 and 208:6; Shulchan Hatahor p. 35, brought in Divrei Menachem on Tur  167:13; Beis Menucha 157:6 concludes like Kesef Mishneh and Rameh; Nishmas Adam 58:2; Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; P”M 208 M”Z 8 in implication of Taz; Shulchan Hatahor 167:11; See Kaf Hachaim ibid; So rule regarding one who recited Mezonos on bread that he is Yotzei, and possibly the same would apply to one who said Ha’adama on bread or Mezonos that he is Yotzei: 1^st opinion in Seder 1:3 [omitted in Admur 168:1 and Luach ibid]; Ritva Brachos 42a; Meiri Brachos 35a; Derisha 168; Elya Raba 208:16; Even Haozer 208:5 and 14; Biur Halacha 167 “Bemakom” that so rule many Poskim

[302] Implication of all Poskim ibid who rule that one fulfills his obligation by Hamotzi [being that it is a fruit of the ground, and hence if by bread one fulfills his obligation certainly the same should apply to Mezonos products even if they are cooked. The difference between cooked versus baked Mezonos is only relevant regarding the case that one accidentally said Hamotzi on a Mezonos product, however seemingly has no relevance to the case here and so is likewise implied from the Tzemach Tzedek ibid and Ketzos Hashulchan ibid who write that even on rice and other cooked legumes one fulfills his obligation if he says Ha’adama]; So rule regarding rice: Taz 208:8; P”M 208 M”Z 8; M”B 208:70; So rule regarding all Mezonos: Yalkut Yosef 3 p. 121; Yabia Omer 9:98 – 13; Yisa Bracha p. 24; Vezos Habracha p. 207; Birchas Hashem 2:243; Seder Birchas Hanehnin of Rav Prus 1:7 p. 10

Other opinions: In some Luchos they write one only fulfills his obligation by bread and by Pas Haba Bekisnin and not by cooked Mezonos. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol, as stated above! [Luach of Rav Gadasi p. 60 and 66; Luach of Rav Elyashvili in end of Seder Birchas Hanehnin p. 156]

[303] Yalkut Yosef 3 p. 121; Yabia Omer 9:98 – 13; Yisa Bracha p. 24; Vezos Habracha p. 207; Birchas Hashem 2:243; Seder Birchas Hanehnin of Rav Prus 1:7 p. 10

Other opinions: In some Luchos they write one only fulfills his obligation by bread and by Pas Haba Bekisnin and not by cooked Mezonos. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol, as stated above! [Luach of Rav Gadasi p. 60 and 66; Luach of Rav Elyashvili in end of Seder Birchas Hanehnin p. 156]

[304] Ketzos Hashulchan 37:10 as explained in footnote 24, and 49 footnote 1; Kaf Hachaim ibid that the main ruling is like the Kesef Mishneh; Beir Moshe 4:21-4; Shevet Halevi 4:19; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21

[305] Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 24 and 34 [although he concludes with a Tzaruch Iyun as to why this workaround was not written in the Poskim; see M”B 176:12, Vetzaruch Iyun]; See Igros Moshe O.C. 4:40 who rules that to escape the dispute, one is to stop his meal, recite Birchas Hamazon and then wash and repeat Hamotzi; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21 that one should here the blessing of Hamotzi or Mezonos from another person eating

[306] Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; Birchas Habayis 7:15; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 34; See Halacha 16!

[307] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 208:23; M”B 202:70; Kaf Hachaim 202:77

[308] All Poskim who rule this way regarding Haeitz on wine, and even more so would this apply regarding Ha’dama: Admur 202:10; Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2 and 10:11 [Omitted from Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:2 and 6:9]; M”A 208:22; Panim Chadashos end of Hilchos Brachos; Shut Mahariy Levi Kelal 5:47

[309] Even Haozer 208:14; Ritva Brachos 2:14; 3:11; Reiah Brachos 40b; Shita Mekubetzes Brachos 35a; Kitzur SHU”A 56:3 in Lechem Hapanim; Orchos Chaim 1208:13; Sdei Chemed Asifas Dinim Mareches Brachos 1:2; Kaf Hachaim 202:11; 208:78, in name of Rameh Alfasi; So rule regarding Haeitz and the same may apply regarding Ha’adama [See Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 7c who leaves this matter in question]: Gloss of Maharil on Admur 202:10 [regarding his ruling that if one said Haeitz on wine that he is not Yotzei] “In the Siddur Admur omitted this ruling and I am almost certain that I heard from Admur’s holy mouth that he retracted his ruling and ruled like the Even Haozer that he is Yotzei.”; Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 208:9 in name of Ginas Veradim; Yad Efraim 202 in name of Halachos Ketanos; Ketzos Hashulchan 49 footnote 1; Toras Menachem on Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:1; See Tzemach Tzedek O.C. 26:4; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 7b; 10d

[310] See Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 7c who leaves this matter in question [and hence Safek Brachos Lihakel!]; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid; Kaf Hachaim ibid

[311] Yad Efraim ibid; Kitzur SHU”A 56:3; See also Sdei Chemed Mareches Brachos 1; Birchas Habayis 7:15; Ketzos Hashulchan 37 footnote 34; See Halacha 16!

[312] Igros Moshe 4:40; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:3; 208:23

[313] Seder 1:4; Luach 1:4-5; Admur 206:1; 202:24; Michaber 206:1; Mishneh Brachos 40a; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2

The law if one accidentally said the blessing on a fruit, if it includes all the future fruits: Some Poskim rule that yes, it includes all the future fruits that he planned on eating. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:1 footnote 1 and 6; Beir Moshe 1:8] Others rule that no. [Aruch Hashulchan 206:3]

[314] Such as fruit jam [Seder 6:4] or perennials [Seder 6:6]

[315] Admur ibid in Seder, Luach, 206:1 and 202:24; Michaber ibid

[316] Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2

[317] Pashut, and is Kol Shekein from Ha’adama product that one is not Yotzei with Haeitz; Halachos Ketanos 1:238, brought in Beir Heiytiv 204:1, regarding cheese; Pesach Hadvir 204:4 regarding mushrooms; Shulchan Hatahor 204:2; Yabia Omer 8:23 – 22; Shevet Halevi 10:42 – 3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 204:7 footnote 28

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that Bedieved, if one said Ha’adama on meat, chicken, fish, eggs, or milk, or honey, that he fulfills his obligation, as all of these products are considered to derive from the ground, was exception to water, salt and fish. [Kaf Hachaim 204:2; Aruch Hashulchan 204:5 regarding mushrooms; Eretz Chaim on Miseches Brachos 40a, brought in Shraga Hameir 4:111 – 3, regarding mushrooms]

[318] See Chayeh Adam 51:9; M”B 203:3; Kaf Hachaim 203:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:2; 18

[319] Biur Halacha 202:9 “Mivareich”

[320] See Rama 202:7; Michaber 202:8 and Kaf Hachaim 202:60 regarding date honey; Shaar Hatziyon 202:54; 205:21; Chazon Ish 33:5; Shevet Halevi 4:19; Az Nidbaru 7:57; Beir Moshe 2:12-4 [regarding tomato juice, plum juice, orange juice and other citrus fruit juices, apple sauce]; Piskeiy Teshuvos 202:16-23 footnote 129

[321] See Admur 202:2

[322] See M”A 206:1; Chayeh Adam 51:12; Derech Hachaim 9; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:2; M”B 202:23, 43; 206:3; Biur Halacha 202:9 “Mivareich”; Shaar Hatziyon 202:26 and 54; 205:21; Kaf Hachaim 206:3; Beir Moshe 2:12-4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:4

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one is not Yotzei if he says Haeitz on a product which is Shehakol or Ha’adama due to not being the main part of the fruit. [Even Haozer ; See Rav Akiva Eiger 202:7] Likewise, some Poskim rule that one is not Yotzei if he says Haeitz on a product which is Shehakol or Ha’adama due to degradation of the fruit, such as if it is better eaten raw then cooked or better eaten cooked than raw and it was eaten in its degraded state. [Shulchan Hatahor 206:2]

[323] P”M 214 M”Z 1; Minchas Shlomo 1:18; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:20-21; 213:1; See Kaf Hachaim 167:77 that if they did not have in mind to be Yotzei the mistaken blessing, and began to ignore it as soon as they heard it, then they are not Yotzei

[324] Beis Meir 167:6, brought in Kaf Hachaim 167:77; Kaf Hachaim 167:77 concludes that if they intended to be Yotzei even after hearing the mistaken words, then they are Yotzei

[325] Admur Seder 1:4; Luach 1:5; Admur 167:13 [regarding bread]; 202:24; 206:1; Michaber 167:10; 206:1; Mishneh Brachos 40a; Piskeiy Teshuvos 167:21

The law if one accidentally said Shehakol on the wrong food, if it includes all the future fruits: If one accidentally recited the blessing of Shehakol on a fruit, then it does not include any other non-Shehakol food that he did not intend on, even if they are in front of him. Certainly, if he said Shehakol on a Shehakol food but had in mind a Haeitz food as well, then he must repeat the correct blessing on all other foods. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:1]

[326] Admur Seder 1:5; Luach 1:5; Admur 202:24; M”A 202:36; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 25a; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:3

[327] Seder 1:4-5; Luach 1:5; Admur 202:24; Michaber 204:13; Rama 202:18; M”A 202:36; Tur 202; Rosh 6:6; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 25a

[328] Such as rice [Seder 1:10] or fruit soup [Seder 7:12] or a fruit which has completely disintegrated [Seder 7:22-24], or soup from vegetables that have cooked in vinegar [Seder 7:21] or legume porridge that has been slightly cooked [Seder 7:24]

[329] Admur 202:24; Omitted from Seder and Luach ibid, despite Admur bringing this concept regarding rice in Seder 1:11!

[330] Except for grapes and raisins, by which one is Yotzei

[331] With exception to those Ha’adama products which are under debate, such as bananas etc

[332] See Michaber 209:1-2; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:11-13; Piskeiy Teshuvos 209:1-3; *Source Sheets

[333] See Kaf Hachaim 209:8

[334] Michaber 209:1 in name of Yeish Omrim; M”A 209:3 that so is Ikar; Kaf Hachaim 209:3; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:11; See Admur 489:20

Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that if one had intent to recite the wrong blessing, then he does not fulfill his obligation, as the main thing goes after one’s intent. [M”A 209:2 in opinion of Rambam Brachos 8:11 in his understanding of Brachos 12a ] Practically, all of the above Poskim question this ruling of the Rambam, as words of the heart are not words and we only follow the words that were actually verbalized by the mouth.

[335] Michaber 209:2, as understood by majority of Achronim; M”A 487:2, unlike his ruling here in 209:3 [see Machatzis Hashekel ibid]; M”B 209:5; Kaf Hachaim 209:9 in name of many Poskim; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:12; Piskeiy Teshuvos 209:3; See regarding the morning blessings: M”A 209:5; P”M 209 A”A 5; M”B 46:20; Kaf Hachaim 46:46; See regarding Kdei Dibbur law: Admur 114:8; 487:1; 582:2 [regarding Hamelech Hakadosh]; Michaber 209:1-2; M”A 209:5; P”M 209 A”A 5; M”B 46:20; Kaf Hachaim 46:46; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:9

Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that if one had intent to recite the wrong blessing and actually said the wrong blessing, then he does not fulfill his obligation, even if he corrected himself within Kdei Dibbur. [M”A 209:3 in opinion of Michaber ibid, Rambam ibid, and other Rishonim; See Kaf Hachaim 209:9]

[336] Admur 206:3; Kneses Hagedola 206; Olas Tamid 206:3; M”A 206:4; Elya Raba 206:5; Chesed Lealafim 206:3; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak 3; Kaf Hachaim 206:15; 582:9

Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that it contains four words “Shalom Aleichem Rebbe Mori.” [Beis Yosef in name of Shivlei Haleket; Levush; Taz 206:3; P”M 487]

[337] See Sdei Chemed Kelalim Taf Peas Hasadeh Mareches Hei; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:9

[338] Rama 209:2; Admur 271:28; Ketzos Hashulchan 55:13

[339] See Michaber 209:2; M”A 209:1 and 3; Ketzos Hashulchan 55 footnote 16 and 18; Kaf Hachaim 209:1 and 9

[340] So rule regarding within Kdei Dibbur that he is Yotzei: Michaber 209:2, as explained in M”A 209:3 and is a Kal Vachomer from Michaber 209:1

[341] So rule regarding after Kdei Dibbur that he is not Yotzei: M”A 209:1 that a) so rule most if not all Poskim, b) So should one rule; Taz 209:1; Bach 209; Kesef Mishneh Kerias Shema 1:8 that many Gedolim argued on Rambam; Question of Chachmei Lunil to Rambam, printed in Peir Hador 25; M”B 209:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 55 footnote 16 and 18; See Kaf Hachaim 209:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 209:1

Other Opinions regarding after Kdei Dibbur – Sephardim: Some Poskim rule that if one had intent to recite the correct blessing, then he always fulfills his obligation, even if his tongue slipped and he recited the wrong blessing as the main thing goes after one’s intent. [Michaber 209:1; Rambam Brachos 8:11 in his understanding of Brachos 12a; Ben Ish Chaiy Balak; Kaf Hachaim 209:1] Practically, all of the above Poskim question this ruling of the Rambam, as words of the heart are not words and we only follow the words that were actually verbalized by the mouth. However, Sephardim are Choshesh for his opinion. [See Kaf Hachaim 209:1 that he should repeat the blessing in his heart in order to suspect for the opinion of the Rambam]

[342] See Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:6; Admur 206:2; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:1; M”B 206:7-11; Kaf Hachaim 206:8-12; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:1-3; 5-7

[343] Admur Seder ibid; Admur ibid; Rashi Brachos 41a; Rashba Brachos 41a; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 28b; Levush 206:4; Olas Tamid 206:2; Ateres Zekeinim 206; Elya Raba 206:2; P”M 206; Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:1; M”B 206:8; Kaf Hachaim 206:10

[344] See Admur Seder 10:7

[345] The reason: As the blessing of Ha’adama is only Motzi an Haeitz fruit when one recites the blessing directly over it, and not when one recites it on a different food of Ha’adama. [Seder ibid]

[346] 1^st opinion in Admur Seder ibid; Only opinion in Admur 206:2; Michaber 206:2; Rabbeinu Yona ibid; Kol Bo 24; Rashba Brachos ibid; Orchos Chaim Hilchos Brachos 20; Levush ibid; Peri Chadash 206; M”B 206:7-8

[347] Admur Seder ibid; 206:2; Taz 206:2; Elya Raba 206:2; Kaf Hachaim 206:8

[348] 2^nd opinion in Admur Seder ibid; Likkutei Peri Chadash 206:2 in opinion of Rashi and Tosafos in Brachos 41a; Chidushei Anshei Sheim in opinion of Rabbeinu Yona; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek 10a; M”B 206:7 and 10

[349] The reason: The sages ruled that the blessing of Ha’adama covers a Haeitz fruit only in this case of Bedieved, where it is not possible to fix the situation and repeat the correct detailed blessing over the fruit, being that this would deem the previous blessing of Ha’adama as a blessing in vain. However, when the blessing would not be considered in vain if one were required to repeat the detailed blessing over the fruit, then it has the same status as always, by which the sages required one to say the correct blessing for that food. [Seder ibid]

The law if one accidentally said the blessing on a fruit, if it includes all the future fruits: Some Poskim rule that yes, it includes all the future fruits that he planned on eating. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:1 footnote 1 and 6; Beir Moshe 1:8] Others rule that no. [Aruch Hashulchan 206:3]

[350] Shaar Hatziyon 206:9; So concludes Ketzos Hashulchan ibid in his summary of this Halacha; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:5

[351] Shaareiy Teshuvah 206:1; M”B 206:10; Piskeiy Teshuvah 206:5

[352] Admur Seder ibid; P”M 206 M”Z 2; Shaareiy Teshuvah M”B 206:7; Kaf Hachaim 206:11 in name of many Achronim; Ketzos Hashulchan 49:4

[353] Seder Birchas Hanehnin 1:16; Luach 1:14; M”A 208:23; Taz 208:7; Levush 208:15; Beis Yosef 208; Kaf Hachaim 208:80-81

Does this ruling apply according all opinions? See Seder 1:6 [brought above in chapter 7 Halacha 19] in which reported a dispute regarding if one fulfills his obligation upon saying a lower level blessing on a certain food, having in mind to include within it a food of a higher blessing, such as if one recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a cucumber and explicitly had in mind to exempt with it the blessing on an apple. Indeed, some Poskim conclude that this same debate is relevant here as well, and that it is only according to the final ruling of Safek Brachos Lihakel that we hold that the blessing is not to be repeated if one said Hagafen over wine and intended to include the grapes or raisins. [Beis Yosef 208] Vetzaruch Iyun from Admur in Seder ibid who makes no mention that this matter is subject to debate and rather implies that it is included in the blessing according to all. Perhaps the difference is that grapes and raisins are in truth the same species as wine, and hence they can be included in the blessing of Hagafen, in contrast to a Ha’adama versus Haeitz product which are two totally different species. [Biur Seder Birchas Hanehnin 14 footnote 3; Rav Alyashvili footnote 116]

[354] P”M 206 M”Z 2; M”B 206:9; Kaf Hachaim 206:9

[355] For example, if he accidentally recited the blessing of Shehakol on a fruit, then it does not include any other non-Shehakol food that he did not intend on, even if they are in front of him. Certainly, if he said Shehakol on a Shehakol food but had in mind a Haeitz food as well, then he must repeat the correct blessing on all other foods. [Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:1]

[356] P”M 206 M”Z 2; M”B 206:9

[357] M”B 176:2 in name of Shita Mekubetzes and Shaar Hatziyon 176:2; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:5and footnote 21; However, see Chazon Ish 34:7

[358] See Seder 5:8; 9:5-7; Admur 206:9; 179:6; Luach 6:5-7; 4:15; Michaber 206:5; M”A 206:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:1-3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18

[359] See Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[360] Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; Michaber 206:5; Tur 206; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 – 1

[361] See Seder 3:8 that a Tafel is exempt with the blessing of an Ikar even if eaten after the Ikar

[362] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; 206:9; Levush 206:5; Elya Raba 206:9

[363] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; 206:9; M”A 206:7; Tevuas Shur 19:33; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 footnote 58

[364] See Seder ibid who brings fruits as the original case example

[365] See 206:9; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18

[366] See 206:9; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18

[367] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; SHU”A ibid; Rama 206:5; Michaber Y.D. 19:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2

[368] Seder 9:5 and 3:6; Luach 6:5 and 4:15; Admur 206:9; 212:10; M”A 206:7; 211:2; Taz 212:1; Tosafus Brachos 44a; M”B 206:21; Vezos Habracha 7; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 – 7

If had Hesech Hadas to second food: If one had a food in front of him when he said a blessing on another food with the same blessing and decided not to eat the food in front of him and then changed his mind to eat the food in front of him, is a new blessing required? For example, one said Shehakol on tea, with marshmallows in front of him, declined an offer of marshmallows and then decided to eat them, is a blessing required before eating the marshmallows? Tzaruch Iyun, however, seemingly not, as Hesech Hadaas has not taken place to the original blessing and its food.

[369] If the food was in its set area of storage: See Vezos Habracha 7 and Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 71 that this only applies if the foods were prepared for eating and are not simply sitting in the fridge or counter where they always remain

[370] See Seder 3:8 that a Tafel is exempt with the blessing of an Ikar even if eaten after the Ikar

[371] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; 206:9; Levush 206:5; Elya Raba 206:9

[372] See Seder ibid who brings fruits as the original case example

[373] Admur Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 – 7

[374] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; Admur 206:9 in parentheses; M”A 206:7; M”B 206:22; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 1^st Chiluk; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[375] Definition of same food: The definition of the same food is that they are of the same species. This applies even if they are of different tastes and colors, such as a green and red apples or green and red grapes, of which we rule regarding the blessing of Shehechiyanu that they each are to receive their own distinct blessing nonetheless, regarding the above matter they are considered to be the same. [Ketzos Hashulchan 63 footnote 10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206 footnote 72]

[376] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[377] See Admur 206:9 that unless one explicitly had in mind to no longer eat any more of that food, then we do not assume that he has resolved to not eat anymore of that food, even after he has already finished it, as it is common for people to continue eating and to increase in the eating that one began if he is brought a second portion.

[378] Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[379] Admur Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7 [however see Piskeiy Teshuvos 206 footnote 74 who writes that according to the M”A ibid if one finished eating the first fruit, then the blessing must be repeated. Seemingly, he refers to the second opinion brought next which is recorded in the M”A ibid, although according to that opinion the blessing must be repeated even if he did not finish eating the first food. Either way, we conclude Safek Brachos Lihakel, and to initially avoid the dispute, so there is no real ramification.]

[380] 2^nd opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7 in name of Tashbeitz 310; Kol Bo 24

[381] It is explicitly evident from the above sources, that the second opinion requires a new blessing to be said on the second food even if it is the exact same species as the first food, such as if one ate a red Apple and was now brought a second red apple. So is evident from Admur in Seder and Luach ibid who writes the term “Mimin Harishon” which is the term used earlier when describing the same exact species. This is further evidence from the wording in Admur 206:9 in which he explicitly writes that the blessing must be repeated even if he was brought “a second of the actual same species.”

[382] The reason: As the concept recorded in Talmud that we assume that it is common for people to continue eating and to increase in the eating that one began if he is brought a second portion refers specifically to a meal and does not apply when a person is eating fruits and the like. [Admur 206:9]

[383] Conclusion of Admur Seder ibid, Luach ibid, SHU”A ibid; M”B 206:22; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 1^st Chiluk [although he makes no mention that this is a dispute and Safek Brachos Lihakel!]

[384] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; SHU”A ibid; Rama 206:5; Michaber Y.D. 19:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 footnote 3

[385] Ketzos Hashulchan 63 footnote 10; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206 footnote 72

[386] Admur Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 3^rd Chiluk

[387] See Admur ibid who gives the example of a food and drink as two completely different foods. However, he earlier implies that they have to be same species, like two types of fruits, and hence fish and cheese would not be considered the same. See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 79, Vetzaruch Iyun.

[388] Admur Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 2^nd Chiluk

[389] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[390] The reason: As so long as he is still partaking in the first food, we assume that he has not resolved to not eat anymore of that same type of food, unless he explicitly has this in mind as it is common for people to continue eating and to increase in the eating that one began if he is brought a second portion. [Admur 206:9]

[391] 2^nd opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7 in name of Tashbeitz 310; Kol Bo 24

[392] The reason: As the concept recorded in Talmud that we assume that it is common for people to continue eating and to increase in the eating that one began if he is brought a second portion refers specifically to a meal and does not apply when a person is eating fruits and the like. [Admur 206:9]

[393] Conclusion of Admur Seder ibid, Luach ibid, SHU”A ibid; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 2^nd Chiluk [although he makes no mention that this is a dispute and Safek Brachos Lihakel!]

[394] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; SHU”A ibid; Rama 206:5; Michaber Y.D. 19:7; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 footnote 3

[395] This is the 1^st example given in Admur ibid “if they are both a species of fruit”; Tehila Ledavid 206:4

[396] This is the 2^nd example given in Admur ibid “if they are both a species of fruit”

[397] Seder 9:6-7; Luach 6:6-7; Admur 206:10; M”A 211:11; Kaf Hachaim 211:24; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 – 8

[398] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:6; Only opinion in Luach 6:6; Only opinion in Admur 206:10; Rama 211:5; M”A 206:8; 211:11; Taz 206:2; Rashba Brachos 41b; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 42a; Reah 42a; Ritva 42a; Shita Mekubetzes 42a; M”B 206:32

[399] The reason: As it is not befitting for a Chashuv food to be exempt with a non-chashuv food’s blessing unless he had this food explicitly in mind to exempt it with the blessing. [Admur Seder 9:7; Luach 6:7; Admur 26:10; M”A 211:11; Rashab ibid]

[400] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:6

[401] See Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2 footnote 7 that even according to this opinion it is not necessary to explicitly have in mind to exempt with the blessing a specific food of significance, and simply intending to include in the blessing all foods of greater importance which will be brought in front of him suffices.

[402] Seder 9:7

[403] 2nd opinion in Admur Seder 9:7 [Omitted from Luach 6:6 and Admur 206:10!]; Implication of Michaber 209:5 [see Kaf Hachaim 209:39]; Mabit 1:224; Sefer Chassidim 847; See Elya Raba 206:10;

[404] See above case #2

[405] So is implied from the beginning wording of Admur ibid that there is no difference at all according to this opinion, and hence even if it was not on the table and he did not have it in mind to eat it would follow the regular law, and so is likewise implied from the Ketzos Hashulchan ibid, and so explicitly learns Kaf Hachaim 206:39

[406] Ketzos Hashulchan 56:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 81

[407] Not on table and did not have in mind to eat: Tzaruch Iyun as to what should be the ruling in a case that it was not on the table and one did not have it in mind at all, and was brought after the blessing, but prior to finishing eating the first food of which it is similar to. On the one hand, it is not even explicit that the second opinion argues in this case that the blessing should not be repeated [although as we wrote above, so is implied]. Furthermore, even if we were to accept that the second opinion argues even in this case that the blessing should not be repeated by the more significant food, this would create a Sfek Sfeika Machlokes, as perhaps we rule like the first opinion that one must always repeat the blessing by a more significant food, and even if we rule like the second opinion perhaps we rule like the opinion who always requires a blessing to be recited upon a second food being brought if one did not have it in mind even if it arrived prior to one finishing eating the fruit. Furthermore, perhaps we can add to the argument to require the blessing to be repeated in such a case the fact that most Poskim rule like the first opinion here, and that Admur in his Luach and SHU”A completely omitted the second opinion, and didn’t even conclude Sfaek Brachos Lihakel but rather that simply one should initially be stringent to explicitly intent on the more significant food. Vetzaruch Iyun!

[408] Admur Seder ibid; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:3

Guests: It is questionable whether the above debate applies even to guests, and as to whether their before blessings cover also the more significant foods that the host will serve them. Accordingly, in order to avoid the above question, it is proper for the guests to explicitly have in mind to exempt also the more significant foods. [Ketzos Hashulchan 56 footnote 6 that so is implied from Admur ibid and 206:9-10]

[409] Admur Seder 9:7 and Luach 6:7

[410] Admur Seder 9:5 and 3:6; Luach 6:5 and 4:15; Admur 206:9; 212:10; M”A 206:7; 212:2; Taz 212:1; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf, end of Dinei Birchas Hanhenin Kelal 7; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

[411] This law is repeated twice in Admur, once in Seder Chapter 3 and once in Seder Chapter 9, and is likewise brought twice in the M”A and SHU”A Admur, in Chapters 206 and 212. It is likewise brought twice in our Sefer, Chapter 7 and 17.

[412] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; 206:9; Levush 206:5; Elya Raba 206:9

[413] Seder 9:5; Luach 6:5; Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7; Tevuas Shur 19:33; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:18 footnote 58

Other opinions: Some Poskim imply that one is to have explicit intent to exempt the secondary food with the blessing of the primary food. [See Mamar Mordechai 212:1; Chesed Lealafim 212:4; Kaf Hachaim 212:2; See previous footnote!]

[414] Admur Seder 9:5 and 3:6; Luach 6:5 and 4:15; Admur 206:9; 212:10; M”A 206:7; 211:2; Taz 212:1; Tosafus Brachos 44a

[415] Admur Seder ibid; Luach ibid; 206:9; Levush 206:5; Elya Raba 206:9

[416] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

[417] See Seder 3:16 that this only applies so long as it would require a blessing if it were not a Tafel as explained in 9:5. This refers to that which we explained that at times a blessing does not have to be repeated over a second food if it is the same exact species as the first food, or is a similar species and one has yet to finish eating the first food. Hence, one would only repeat the blessing on the Tafel if it is a totally different species then the Ikar, or one has already finished eating the Ikar and it is not the same exact species.

[418] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

[419] Seder 5:8 [When present at the meal of a host, the blessing one says on the fruits [or any other food] includes all future fruits of that blessing.]; 9:5 and 8; 12:13; Luach 6:5; 7:8; Admur 174:10; 179:7; 206:9; Michaber 179:5; Brachos 42a; Hagahos Rabbeinu Peretz on Tashebitz; Tosafus Brachos 42a; M”A 179:7; Mateh Yehuda 179:3; Elya Raba 179:8; Mamar Mordechai 179:6; Nehar Shalom 179:4; P”M 179 M”Z 4; Chayeh Adam 60:5; Kitzur SHU”A 57:6; Kaf Hachaim 179:18; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2; 58:12; Piskeiy Teshuvos 179:8-9

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the guests must repeat a blessing on every food that they are offered. [Taz 179:4]

[420] The reason: As guests naturally have in mind when they recite a blessing for it to cover all future foods that will be served which share that same blessing as they initially come with intent to partake in the menu that will be served by their host. Hence, it is considered retroactively as if they already had it in mind at the time that they recited the blessing. [Admur ibid in all sources; Taz 179:3]

[421] Seder 5:8; Luach 7:8; Admur 179:7; Michaber ibid; Rama 174:5; Tashbeitz 300; M”A 179:6

The reason: As when he said a blessing on the first food he did not have any knowledge as to whether he would be offered another food. [Admur 174:10]

[422] Ketzos Hashulchan 56 footnote 6 that so is implied from Admur ibid and 206:9-10

[423] This is the example given in Admur Seder 5:8; SHU”A 179:6

[424] Aruch Hashulchan 179:6; Piskeiy Teshuavos ibid; Rav Elyashvili in footnote 51 on Seder ibid

[425] Rav Elyashvili in footnote 51 on Seder ibid;

[426] See Biur Halacha 179:2 “Ad Sheyomar”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 179:8 footnote 41

[427] P”M 179, brought in  Daas Torah 179 and Biur Halacha ibid; Rav Elyashvili in footnote 51 on Seder ibid; See

[428] Aruch Hashulchan 179:6; Ashel Avraham Butchach; Betzel Hachochma 6:69; Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid;

[429] Ketzos Hashulchan 56:9 based on Admur 179:7 and Seder 5:8 and M”A 179:6; See Chapter 7 Halacha 19F!

[430] See Admur Seder 9:8-10; Luach 6:8-10; Admur 206:11-13; 271:27-28; Michaber and Rama 206:6; Rambam Brachos 4:10; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; Rosh Brachos 6:20; M”B 206:24-26; Kaf Hachaim 206:40-46; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:4-6; 79:6 footnote 23; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:23-24

[431] Seder 9:8 [Only opinion]; Luach 6:8 [Only opinion]; 2^nd opinion in Admur 206:11, and conclusion that so is Ikar based on Safek Brachos Lihakel; 271:27; Implication of Rama ibid; Beis Yosef 206; M”A 206:8; Rabbeinu Tam in Hagahos Maimanis Brachos 4:7; Abudarham Seder Hilchos Hamotzi in name of Raavad; Taz 206:8; Elya Raba 202:1; Derech Hachaim 70; Kitzur SHU”A 50:4; Aruch Hashulchan 206:15; Kaf Hachaim 206:42; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:4

Other opinions in Admur and Poskim – Stringent: Some Poskim rule that one must repeat the blessing over the new food in all cases that the original food in his hand became lost, even if it was in front of him and he intended on also eating it at the time that he recited the blessing as the blessing only counts for the food that is currently in his hand and it is just that that food ends up exempting all future foods. However, if one does not end up eating the food in his hand then no other food is exempt with this blessing. [1^st and Stam opinion in Admur 206:11; Possible understanding of Michaber ibid; Taz 206:8; Rambam Brachos 4:10; Rosh Brachos 6:20; Elya Raba 206:10; See Kaf Hachaim 206:42]

Other opinions Lenient: Some Poskim rule that if he had more of any food or beverage of that same blessing in front of him, then he can salvage the blessing by immediately eating that food and a new blessing is not needed to be repeated. [M”B 206:26; 209:8; Biur Halacha 206:6 “Rak Shelo Hayah Daato”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:23]

[432] Must the second food on the table be the same exact Min as the first food?

[433] Admur ibid “Bivirur”; Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek p. 198b Chaf that it negates Bistam

[434] The reason: As unless one had explicitly intended to also eat from the food that is on the table after he finishes eating that which is in his hands, then we consider the blessing to only cover the food which he originally held in his hand upon reciting the blessing. [Seder 9:8]

[435] Seder 9:9; Luach 6:9; Admur 206:11; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:5 and 79 footnote 24; See Derech Hachaim 70; Kitzur SHU”A 50:4; Aruch Hashulchan 206:15

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that if he had intent to eat more of that food or beverage even if it is not in front of him, then he can salvage the blessing by immediately eating that food and a new blessing is not needed to be repeated. [M”B 206:26; 209:8; Biur Halacha 206:6 “Rak Shelo Hayah Daato”, brought and negated in Ketzos Hashulchan ibid footnote 8 and 79 footnote 24; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:23]

[436] The reason: Although if one would have eaten from the food in his hand, then he would not be required to repeat the blessing upon eating more food of that same type, even if it was not on the table at the time that he recited the blessing. Nonetheless, if the food gets lost, then its blessing does not cover the food that was not in front of him. [Seder 9:9] As it only counts for the future foods on the basis of the original food that was eaten, and hence it the original food wasn’t eaten that the original blessing is invalid. [Chidushei Tzemach Tzedek p. 198b Chaf]

[437] Admur 206:12 [Omitted from Seder and Luach ibid];

[438] Rama 206:2; Maharil 92; Perisha 206:9; Darkei Moshe 209:1; Olas Tamid 209

[439] Seder 9:10; Luach 6:10; Admur 206:13; 25:23; Michaber 206:6; Rambam Brachos 4:10; Shavuos 12:11; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; Ketzos Hashulchan 5:13; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:24-25

[440] Seder Birchas Hanehnin 9:10; Luach Birchas Hanehnin 6:10; Admur 206:13; Michaber 206:6; Rosh Brachos 6:20; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 39a

[441] Tehillim 119:12

[442] Admur 271:27-28

[443] See Ketzos Hashulchan 79 footnote 23

One is Yotzei Havdala in such a case as rules Admur in 271:27 regarding Kiddush. One is also does not have to repeat the blessing of Hagafen on the new cup of wine in such a case as rules Admur in Seder 9:5; 206:9

[444] 271:28 regarding finding water or spoiled wine in the cup and the same would apply here that the wine spilled. The reason it is valid is because holding the cup of wine in one’s hand while saying the blessings is only required initially, while after the fact it is valid even if the cup remained on the table. [ibid]   See also Ketzos Hashulchan 79:6 which rules this way regarding Kiddush.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

[445] Admur rules that even when one has wine in front of him he only saves himself the need to repeat the blessing if he had in mind to drink the wine that was on the table after Kiddush [so is implied from Admur 271:28 from the words “prepared to be drunk” and from the KU”A 8 and so rules Admur explicitly in 206:11; Seder 9:8; Ketzos Hashulchan ibid]

Other Opinions: The M”B [206:26] rules that whenever one has more wine in front of him even if he did not have in mind to drink any more wine, he does not repeat the blessing of Hagafen.

[446] 271:27 and Ketzos Hashulchan 79:6 regarding Kiddush and the same applies for Havdala; So rules Piskeiy Teshuvos 296:11

[447] See however Ketzos Hashulchan 79 footnote 24 that if one has wine in the house and had in mind to drink more after Kiddush [or Havdala] then it is as if it is sitting on the table and one is not required to repeat the blessing of Hagafen.

[448] See Admur Seder 9:9; Luach 6:9; Admur 206:11 [even according to 1^st opinion]; Michaber 206:6; Yerushalmi Brachos 6:1; See M”B 206:24-26; Kaf Hachaim 206:40-46; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:4-6; 79:6 footnote 23; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:23-24

[449] The reason: The reason for this is because to begin with when he said the blessing he knew that the water which is in front of him will flow away and hence intended to say the blessing on the new waters that will come after the blessing is complete. [Seder 9:9; Admur 206:11] [Hence, this is not considered as if he said a blessing on food that became lost and then received new food by which we rule that a new blessing must be repeated.] Alternatively, the reason is because all the water is considered connected and hence within the water that was in front of him is included the future flow of water which he will drink from. [Admur 206:11 in parentheses]

[450] Admur 183:13; Piskeiy Teshuvos 183:19

[451] Admur 183:12; Michaber 183:9; Rambam Hilchos Brachos 4:1; Brachos 51b

[452] 2^nd opinion in Admur 183:13; Admur ibid; Opinion in Michaber 183:10; Mordechai Brachos 184; Rambam Hilchos Brachos 4:1; See Biur Hagr”a who implies that all Rishonim who hold one is t required to recite Meiyn Shalosh in the original place of eating, agree here as well that one is required to sit while reciting it.

[453] Admur ibid; Chesed Lealafim 183:10; Ben Ish Chaiy Chukas 4; Kaf Hachaim 183:51

[454] Chesed Lealafim 183:10; Ben Ish Chaiy Chukas 4; Kaf Hachaim 183:51; Piskeiy Teshuvos 183:19; See P”M Pesicha Koleles Brachos; 432 M”Z 1; Mur Uketiza 8 regarding things eaten and drunk in a sitting position; Meorer Yisheinim 26; Tosefes Chaim on Chayeh Adam 5

[455] See Ben Ish Chaiy Bereishis 2:29; Rav Poalim 2:45; Darkei Chaim Veshalom 278; Orchos Rabbeinu 3:222; See regarding Havdala: Admur 296:15; M”A 296:4; Mateh Moshe 509; Maharil 8; Miseches Derech Eretz Zuta; Kneses Hagedola 296:3; Elya Raba 296:14; Beir Heiytiv 170:16; M”B 296:6; Kaf Hachaim 296:42; Kitzur Halachos 296 footnote 14; See regarding health: Gittin 70a; Rambam Deios 4:3; Chupas Eliyahu Raba 3, in end of Reishis Chochma; Yifei Laleiv 155:6; Aruch Hashulchan O.C. 179:9; Y.D. 116:15; Kitzur SHU”A 32:5; Kaf Hachaim O.C. 155:25; Y.D. 116:90; Likkutei Maharich 1; See M”B 296:6; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 25:1; Ein Lamo Michshol 1 p. 376

 Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 25:1; Ein Lamo Michshol 1 p. 376

[456] Admur 213:1 and 5; Michaber 213:1; Tur 174; Rashi Brachos 43a; Tosafus Chulin 106b

[457] Admur 213:1 regarding Kiddush and Havdala; 213:5 regarding Haeish and Besamim; M”A 213:1; 273:13; Alef Lamagen 625:74; Kaf Hachaim 213:3

[458] Kaf Hachaim 585:1; Machatzis Hashekel on M”A 690:1 regarding Megillah; Beis Oved 690:9 brought in Kaf Hachaim 690:2; Shaar HaTziyon 690:1; Vetzaruch Iyun as to the opinion of Admur in all this, as in 585:2 Admur rules that the people fulfilling the Mitzvah of Tekiah do not have to stand, despite the fact that the person blowing the Shofar has to stand. No mention is made that they have to stand while reciting the blessing. Vetzaruch Iyun.

[459] Ben Ish Chaiy Netzavim 15 brought in kaf Hachaim 585:1; See also Yifei Laleiv 2:2; Kaf Hachaim 690:2 that so was custom of the Beis Keil shul in Jerusalem; Mikraeiy Kodesh brought in Piskeiy Teshuvos 690:1

[460] Michaber 169:2; Kaf Hachaim 169; Piskeiy Teshuvos 169:3

[461] Michaber ibid; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 42a

[462] Rama ibid; Rabbeinu Yona Brachos 42a; Elya Raba 169:2; Olas Tamid 169:3; Soles Belula 169:1; See Kaf Hachaim 169:13-14

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that even when given as charity, it is forbidden. [Beis Yosef 169; Rashal; See Kaf Hachaim 169:13]

The reason: As giving charity is a definite Mitzvah while whether or not he will recite a blessing is a doubt, and we do not cancel a definite Mitzvah due to Safek. [Taz 169:3; See Kaf Hachaim 169:13]

[463] M”A 169:6; Shelah p. 82; Olas Tamid 169:3; Elya Raba 169:2; M”B 169:11; Kaf Hachaim 169:14

[464] Bach 169, brought in M”A ibid; See Kaf Hachaim 169:13 and 15

[465] The reason: As there is no transgression taking place by simply giving him the food, and if he decides to afterwards to not recite a blessing upon eating it, what could the person have done. [M”A 169:6]

[466] Shelah p. 82; Kaf Hachaim 169:13; Shevet Halevi 8:47; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 2:138; Piskeiy Teshuvos 169:3; See Igros Moshe O.C. 5:13

[467] See Igros Moshe O.C. 5:13; Minchas Shlomo 1:35; Shevet Halevi 4:17; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:483; 2:138; Shevet Hakehasi 4:329; Piskeiy Teshuvos 169:3 footnote 13

[468] Shevet Hakehasi ibid

[469] Machatzis Hashekel 6:9 based on Asara Mamaors; Zohar Eikev and Vayeitzei; See Shach C.M. 382:4 in name of Mahrashal who writes it is an obligation to recite blessings aloud in order to merit others with Amen and one who does not do so is a Rasha and see Shach ibid that the law that one is obligated to pay 10 Zehuvim for a stolen blessing is only if one could not answer Amen, such as the person who said the blessing said it quietly, and only if one planned to say the blessing aloud; See however Smeh 382:7 and Shach ibid that the above obligation is only by Milah, being it was instituted to be said aloud and in public, however by other Mitzvos, such as Shechita or covering the blood, one may say it quietly and so is the custom; See See Bigdei Yesha 167:33 in name of Kisvei Arizal that if one is alone and unable to have someone answer Amen to his blessing he is to say it with great desire and love of Hashem. This concentration creates an angel who then answers Amen to his blessing.

[470] Zohar ibid; Asara Mamaros ibid; Machatzis Hashekel ibid

[471] Ben Ish Chaiy Maasey 14

[472] Heard from Rav Yehuda Leib and Eliyahu Landa Shlita; The Rebbe by Farbrengens was not heard to say blessings aloud, allowing the public to answer Amen; See also Smeh and Shach ibid that only by Milah is it an actual obligation

The reason: As Admur 213:4 rules that one who hears a blessing according to some opinions is Yotzei even if he did not have intent to be Yotzei, and hence in order to prevent others from entering into this doubt we therefore recite the blessings silently.