18. Repeating the blessing on a second food – Must a blessing be repeated upon eating a subsequent food & when can a single blessing count for many foods of that same blessing:[1]

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 ?? 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[2], or Shinuiy Makom. This matter will be explained at length in Chapter ??.

A. Kavana – Had in mind to eat the other foods:[3]

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 Ikkur food even if it is of a different blessing[4], 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[5] 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.[6] [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:[7] 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!

 

May one have in mind upon reciting a blessing to include all other foods of that blessing that he may decide to eat?[8] Yes. For example, one can say a Shehakol on a drink or other food in the beginning of a meal and have in mind to include all other Shehakol foods that he may decide to eat during that meal. The initial Shehakol is valid for all the Sheakol foods of that meal even though he did not know what foods he would eat when he initially said the blessing.   May one have in mind in the morning upon reciting a blessing to include all other foods of that blessing that he will eat later on that day?[9] No. Having in mind other foods only works until one has digested the food on which the original blessing was said over.

Practical advice:[10] Due to the above ability to always exempt a subsequent food that will be brought to the table by simply having it in mind upon saying the blessing, one should accustomed himself to explicitly intend upon saying a blessing, for that blessing to cover all future foods of a similar blessing that will be brought to the table. Through doing so one avoids all questions, disputes, and doubts that will be discussed throughout the coming cases.

B. Foods that are on the table – Repeating the blessing for other foods which were on the table when the blessing was recited:[11]

If at the time that one recited the original blessing there were other foods in front of him[12] of a similar blessing, or if there was in front of him a Tafel food to the first Ikkur food even if it is of a different blessing[13], 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[14] 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:[15] 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.

 

C. No Kavana, and not originally on table – Must the blessing be repeated upon eating a subsequent food:^[16]

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:[17] If after reciting a blessing on a food and then eating that food, more of the same exact[18] food was brought to the table, then some Poskim[19] 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[20] Hesech Hadas against eating anymore[21] [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.[22] However, other Poskim[23] 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 e it was not in front of him at the time of the blessing, even if it is a second of that same exact food[24] 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].[25] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakel, and hence the blessing is not to be repeated even if he completely finished eating the first food.[26] 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.[27] [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[28]] 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.

Case 2 – Completely different foods but similar blessing:[29] If after reciting a blessing on a food a completely[30] 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 Ikkur 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:[31] 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[32] 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.[33] However, other Poskim[34] 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].[35] 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.[36] 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.[37] [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:[38] 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:[39] 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:[40]

Some Poskim[41] 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, then a new blessing must be repeated over the significant food.[42] 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.[43] 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[44] within the blessing.[45] 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[46], 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[47] who exempt it in such a case[48]], 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[49] if it was in front of him, or one had in mind to eat it[50], 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.[51]

• Example:[52] 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. Practcially, 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.

E. Ikkur Vetafel – The law when a Tafel is brought after saying a blessing on the Ikkur:[53]

Had Tafel in mind upon saying blessing on Ikkur: If at the time that one recited the blessing on a main food [i.e. Ikkur] 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 Ikkur food has already been finished. This applies even if one has already finished eating the Ikkur food over which the blessing was recited[54] 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 Ikkur to be Motzi the Tafel with the blessing, but merely had in mind to eat it.[55]

• 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 Ikkur:[56] If at the time that one recited the original blessing on the Ikkur 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 Ikkur, and applies even if one has already finished eating the Ikkur food over which the blessing was recited[57] 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 Ikkur 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 Ikkur: If at the time that one recited the blessing on a main food [i.e. Ikkur] one did not have in mind to eat the Tafel 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 Ikkur [and even if he plans on eating the two foods together[58]] and even if they share the same blessing, and even if eating the Tafel will cause one to eat more of the Ikkur [if the two foods are not of similar nature as explained in C].

• 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.[59]

F. The law by guests:[60]

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.[61] 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.[62] [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:[63] 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:[64] 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:[65] 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:[66] 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:[67] 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.[68] However, some Poskim[69] rule that he does have the status of a guest in this regard.

_____________________________________________________

[1] 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

[2] See Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[11] 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.

[12] 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

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

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

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

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

[17] 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

[18] 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]

[19] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[20] 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.

[21] Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[22] 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.]

[23] 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

[24] 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.”

[25] 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]

[26] 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!]

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

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

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

[30] 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.

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

[32] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:5 and Luach 6:5 and Admur 206:9; M”A 206:7

[33] 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]

[34] 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

[35] 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]

[36] 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!]

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

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

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

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

[41] 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

[42] 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]

[43] 1^st and Stam opinion in Admur Seder 9:6

[44] 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.

[45] Seder 9/7

[46] 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;

[47] See above case #2

[48] 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

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

[50] 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!

[51] 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]

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

[53] 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; Shelah Shaar Haosiyos Os Kuf, end of Dinei Birchas Hanhenin Kelal 7; Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

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

[55] Admur Seder ibid; M”A 206:7

[56] 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

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

[58] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

[59] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 206:21

[60] 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; Ketzos Hashulchan 56:2; 58:12; Piskeiy Teshuvos 179:8-9

[61] 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]

[62] 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]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bookmark