Must the blessing be repeated upon eating a subsequent food:^[1]

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:[2] If after reciting a blessing on a food and then eating that food, more of the same exact[3] food was brought to the table, then some Poskim[4] 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, so long as he has not performed explicit[5] Hesech Hadas against eating anymore[6] [as explained in Chapter ?? 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.[7] However, other Poskim[8] 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, even if it is a second of that same exact food[9] 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].[10] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakel, and hence the blessing is not to be repeated even if he completely finished eating the first food.[11] 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.[12]

• For example: If one recited a Haeitz on one apple and a second apple [even if of different color or taste[13]] 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 1^st 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.

________________________________________

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

[2] 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

[3] 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]

[4] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[5] 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.

[6] Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[7] 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.]

[8] 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

[9] 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.”

[10] 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]

[11] 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!]

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

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