Said wrong Bracha Rishona on Hamotzi bread– Law of Bedieved:[1]

Said Mezonos on Hamotzi bread:[2] If one accidentally recited the blessing of Mezonos on Hamotzi bread then some Poskim[3] rule that he fulfills his obligation.[4] However, other Poskim[5] argue that one does not fulfill his obligation.[6] Practically, Safek Brachos Lehakeil [and hence the blessing of Hamotzi is not to be repeated].[7] [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.[8] 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.[9]]

Said Hagafen on Hamotzi bread: 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.

Said Haeitz on Hamotzi bread:[10] Some Poskim[11] rule that if one recited Haeitz over Hamotzi bread [or a Mezonos food, made of wheat[12]] then he fulfills his obligation.[13] Many Poskim[14], 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.]

Said Ha’adama on Hamotzi bread:[15] Some Poskim[16] rule that one who recited the blessing of Ha’adama on a Hamotzi food does not fulfill his obligation, and he is therefore required to repeat the blessing of Hamotzi on the food. Other Poskim[17], however, rule that he does fulfill his obligation. Practically, we rule that Safek Brachos L’hakel and hence he is not to repeat the blessing.[18] [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 food, just in case that it was not exempted with the Ha’adama blessing.[19] Alternatively, he can be Yotzei the blessing with another person who is now beginning to eat bread. Likewise, if one remembers his mistake within Kdei Dibbur, then one is to initially correct himself and conclude with the words Hamotzi Lecehm Min Ha’aretz.[20]]

Said Shehakol on Hamotzi bread:[21] 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.

+ 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

__________________________________

[1] 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

[2] 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

[3] 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

[4] 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]

[5] 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]

[6] 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]

[7] 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.

[8] 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

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

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

[11] 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

[12] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid

[13] 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]

[14] All Poskim ibid who rule one is not Yotzei with Hadama, and certainly this would apply with Haeitz. Furthermore, possibly even those Poskim who ruled that one is Yotzei with Hadama, 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;

[15] 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 Hadama on bread. However, in his earlier work called Luach Birchas Hanehnin 1:2-3 Admur ruled that he is not Yotzei if he said Hadama 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 Hadama if the rice is whole, while if it is ground such as Mezonos rice bread, then one is not Yotzei with Hadama, and if Hadama 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 Hadama on Mezonos or bread. [See Ketzos Hashulchan 49 footnote 1] Likewise, possibly from his omission in Seder 1:3 of the case of Hadama, one can deduce that he retracted from his ruling in the Luach. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 167 footnote 136] Vetzaruch Iyun.

[16] 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 Leavrahm 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 Hadama 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

[17] Kesef Mishneh Brachos 4:6 “One can possibly say that if one said Hadama 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 Hadama 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 Hadama 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

[18] 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

[19] 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

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

[21] 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

[22] 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

[23] 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

[24] 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

[25] 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