Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 206 - Laws Governing Interruptions and Errors in Blessings Recited over Produce

SECTION 206 The Laws Governing Interruptions and Errors in Blessings Recited over Produce. (1–15)

1 One who recited the blessing Borei pri ha­adamah over fruit that grows on trees fulfills his obligation, since the tree grows primarily from the earth1 [and derives its nurture from it]. If, by contrast, one recites the blessing Borei pri haetz on the produce of the earth, he does not fulfill his obligation. Therefore, if one is in doubt whether a specific type of produce is “the fruit of the trees” or “the fruit of the earth,” he should recite the blessing Borei pri haadamah, [since, by doing so,] he will fulfill his obligation in any case. If one recites the blessing Shehakol nih’yah bidvaro on any food, even on bread or wine, he fulfills his obligation.2 All the above applies after the fact. As an initial preference, however, one should recite the blessing specific to each food, unless he is still in doubt despite having studied [the laws of blessings], as stated in sec. 202[:24].

2 If both produce from “the fruit of the trees” and “the fruit of the earth” were in front of a person and he first recited the blessing on the fruit of the earth, he must recite a second blessing on the fruit of the trees. Such fruit is covered by the blessing Borei pri haadamah only when one recites the blessing on it and not when that blessing was recited on “the fruit of the earth.”

When does the above apply? When one recited the blessing without a specific intent. If, however, he specifically intended to cover the fruit of the trees as well, he fulfills his obligation. [This ruling applies] even when the fruit of the trees was not yet in his presence when he recited the blessing, but was brought to him [only] afterwards.3

3 With regard to all these blessings, one must not interrupt between the blessing and partaking [of the food over which the blessing was recited]. [This stringency applies even to initiating and responding to greetings to and from] one who commands fear and one who is to be honored.4 If a person made an interruption by speaking about a matter that does not concern [what he is] eating, he must repeat the blessing, as explained in sec. 167[:9].

It is even forbidden to interrupt by pausing silently for more than [the brief time span called] kdei dibbur, i.e., the time it takes for a student to greet his mentor [by saying] the three words, Shalom alecha, rabi (“Peace upon you, my teacher!”).5 If he paused longer, however, he is not required to repeat the blessing.

Even as an initial preference, pausing for a purpose associated with [the food he is] eating is not considered an interruption at all.6 Therefore, when a person recites a blessing over a fruit, cuts it, and partakes of it, he should not cut it until after [he recites] the blessing, so that he will be able to recite a blessing over [the fruit while it is still] whole, for that is the optimum manner of fulfilling the mitzvah, as explained in sec. 168[:11]. There is no concern over the interruption and the delay between the blessing and eating that cutting [the fruit] caused, because it is necessary for eating. Nevertheless, one who eats a nut or the like should break [the shell] open and recite the blessing afterwards. [The rationale:] It might have become wormy or rotten inside [and thus unfit to eat,] in which case he would have recited the blessing in vain.

4 All the blessings may be recited in any language.7 Whether it is necessary to understand the blessings [or not] is discussed in sec. 185[:2].8

5 A person must recite [a blessing] in an audible tone. Nevertheless, if he did not recite it audibly, he fulfills his obligation, provided he verbalizes the words with his lips, as explained in sec. 185[:3].9

6 A person must be careful with regard to [factors that invalidate a blessing, for example, the presence of] feces,10 urine,11 revealed nakedness,12 or the fact that his heart sees his nakedness,13 as [is stated] with regard to the recitation of theShema. A woman is permitted to sit naked and recite a blessing,14 because when she is sitting, her private parts are covered by the earth or the bench on which she is sitting,15 and [also] by her legs when she straightens them and holds them closely together. This [leniency] does not apply with regard to a man, because his member and his testicles project outward and are visible.

7 A blessing should not be recited while one’s head is uncovered, as stated in sec. 91[:3].16

8 Whenever one recites a blessing over an object, whether to partake of it,17 to enjoy its fragrance,18 or to perform a mitzvah with it,19 he must hold it in his right hand while reciting the [appropriate] blessing.20

There is an authority who states that, according to Kabbalah, one should not stick a knife into the fruit over which a blessing is being recited and hold the knife in his right hand [while reciting the blessing], for this is combining two opposites in a single matter. For the right hand produces effects associated with life,21 while a knife represents the power of Esav22 that shortens life, as explained in sec. 180[:6].

9 If the person did not hold [the food over which he was reciting the blessing], but the food was in his presence when he recited the blessing, he fulfills his obligation. If he recited the blessing and the food was only brought to him afterwards, he must recite the blessing again,23 even if during the recitation of the blessing he had in mind [the food that would be brought to him later].

If, however, one recited a blessing on fruit that was in his presence and then he was brought other fruits of that same species or [even] of another type, but which were covered by the blessing recited over the first [fruit] — [either] because both [species] share the same blessing, or because the first was of primary importance (ikar) and the other was secondary (tafel) to it24 — he need not recite a second blessing. [This ruling applies] even if the second type of fruit was brought to him after nothing remained of the first type, because he had consumed it entirely.

[The above applies] provided that, when reciting the blessing, one had in mind to also partake of the second type of fruit even if he did not specifically intend to cover it with this blessing. If, however, he did not think of eating the second type of fruit when he recited the blessing, he must recite a blessing over the second fruit if he had consumed the first fruit entirely before the second type was brought to him.

If, however, some of the type of food [over which he recited the blessing] remained before him when a second type that resembled the first25 — i.e., they are both types of fruit or both types of beverages — was brought to him, there is no need to recite a blessing over the second. [The rationale:] As long as he is occupied with eating or drinking the first [type of food or beverage], it can be assumed that he did not divert his attention [from eating or drinking further] unless he actually [decided to stop eating and then] changed his mind [and desired to eat again]. For this is man’s ordinary pattern when he is occupied with eating or drinking — to continue and be drawn from eating one food to another and from drinking one beverage to another.

If, however, he was drinking beer, and fish was bought to him to offset [the sharp taste of the beer], even though they both share the same blessing and [moreover,] the fish is secondary (tafel) to the beer, because [after partaking of the fish] he will then drink more [beer, the fish] is not covered by the original blessing [that he recited over the beer], unless he had the fish in mind, or it was in his presence at the time he recited the blessing [over the beer], as explained in sec. 212[:10].

(If, [however,] the exact same food was [later] brought to him, even if he had already entirely consumed the first [serving], he is not required to recite a second blessing, unless he [had consciously decided to stop eating and then] changed his mind [and decided to eat again]. Ordinarily, however, it can be assumed that one does not divert his attention from eating more of the same type of food that was before him when he recited the blessing if [more] were to be brought to him, because it is a person’s common pattern to be drawn after his food and to eat more of it, once he has begun eating.)

There are authorities who maintain that the above principles were stated only with regard to a meal at which a person sits down26 to eat. When, by contrast, he eats fruits or the like, even if he sits down in a fixed setting to partake of them, his sitting down is of no consequence, because there is no concept of establishing a fixed setting [when it comes] to partaking of fruit. [Thus,] since [during his recitation of the blessing], he did not have in mind the fruit that would be brought to him after his recitation of the blessing, even though his decision to eat further is not a total change of mind, he must recite a second blessing in all instances. [This rule applies] even if [others] later brought him the exact same type of fruit [over which he already recited the blessing at first], and even if he had not yet [finished] eating the original fruit.

[In this instance, we rule according to the former opinion and an additional blessing should not be recited, since we follow the principle:] When there is uncertainty with regard to a blessing, we rule leniently. Nevertheless, as an initial preference, [while reciting the blessing], it is desirable to be careful to have in mind to partake of everything [covered by this blessing] that one might be served.

When guests are invited [by their host] to partake of fruits, since they rely on their host who invited them, it is as if they had in mind everything that he would bring them, as stated in sec. 179[:7]. Even if he brought them a different type of fruit after the first type was consumed entirely, they need not recite a second blessing.

10 All the above applies when the first and the second types of fruit are of equal importance and one would not take precedence over the other if both were in the person’s presence [at the time he recited the blessing]. If, however, the second is more important than the first because it is one of the seven species [for which Eretz Yisrael was praised],27 or it is [personally] cherished more in the manner explained in sec. 211,28 it is not covered by the blessing recited over the first fruit. [This ruling applies] even if the second fruit was also in his presence at the time he recited the blessing over the first, but he recited the blessing without any specific intent and he did not have in mind to cover the second type of fruit with this blessing. Even though it can be assumed that he had it in mind [when reciting the blessing], it is not appropriate for [the blessing over] an entity that is not as important to incidentally cover an entity that is more important. [The more important fruit is covered by the blessing recited over the less important one,] only when he specifically intended to cover it, but not when one does not have that specific intent, (as stated in sec. 176).29 If the person intended to cover [the second food with the blessing recited over the first], it is covered [by that blessing], even if it was not in his presence at the time the blessing was recited. If [the second, more important fruit] was brought before the person while he was reciting the blessing, even though it is more desirable than the first and cherished more by him, and [even if it was] also one of the seven species, he should partake of the first initially (because he began to recite the blessing with it in mind).

11 If a person took a fruit in his hand with the intent of partaking of it and recited a blessing over it, but it fell from his hand and was lost, or it became so repugnant that it was no longer fit to be eaten, [even] if there was more of this type of fruit in his presence, he must recite another blessing on [the other fruit].30 [This ruling applies] even if he had [this additional fruit] in mind when he recited the blessing. [The rationale:] The blessing applies to [the fruit] that he held in his hand at the time he recited the blessing and [through] that, it covers all the other fruit. Thus, if he did not partake of [the fruit he was holding while reciting the blessing, the other fruit] is not covered by the blessing he recited on the one [he had held during the recitation].

Nevertheless, a person standing near a [flowing] water canal may recite a blessing and drink, even though the water that was before him at the time he recited the blessing has already flowed further. [The rationale]: His original intent was not to drink the water that was before him [at the time of the blessing], but to drink the water that would flow before him after [concluding] his blessing. [When he now drinks], it is to this water that his blessing applied.

There are authorities who maintain that a blessing covers all the food that is ready [to be eaten] and in a person’s presence that he had in mind [to eat at the time he recited the blessing. Therefore,] he need not recite a second blessing if the fruit over which he recited the blessing fell from his hand. Similarly, he need not recite another blessing, if he recited a blessing over a cup [filled with liquid, the cup spilled before he drank from it,] and he refilled it from the pitcher that was before him on the table or on the bench next to him that was prepared [to provide him] with drink. This view should be given primacy, [because] one should follow a lenient approach when there is an uncertainty with regard to blessings.31

[The above applies] provided he clearly intended to eat and drink [from the other food and/or drink] in his presence, even if [the food or drink] over which he recited the blessing had not fallen from his hand. If, however, he did not have any specific intent, the blessing covers only what was in the person’s hand at the time he recited the blessing.

Even if his intent was specifically to eat and drink more[food or drink], the blessing does not cover them unless they were in his presence at the time he recited the blessing. If, by contrast, [the other food or drink] was brought before him [only afterwards], he must recite a second blessing on it if the food in his hand fell from it, even in a situation where, had he eaten or drunk from what was in his hand, he would not have had to recite a blessing on [the other food or drink].

(The water in a water canal [represents a different situation]. Since all the water in the canal is intermingled and joined together, [it is like] a single body. Therefore, the blessing covers the entire body of water, including also the water that was not in the person’s presence at the time he recited the blessing.)

12 All the above applies when the person eats or drinks alone. [Different rules apply] if there are others with him and he is reciting the blessing for them as well, to enable them to fulfill their obligation. If the object fell from his hand after he recited the blessing, there are authorities who maintain that there is no need for him to recite a blessing again when the others partake of [the food or drink] after his blessing [and then more is brought to him]. For the blessing [he recited] also covers the food that was in the hands of others — and, indeed, even if it was not held in their hands, but merely present before them. For his blessing applies to the food that was placed before them [as well]. Therefore, he too is not required to recite another blessing on what is brought to him afterwards. He should, however, be careful not to [needlessly] interrupt by speaking in the interim.32

13 Whenever a person must recite another blessing [because] his first blessing was recited in vain, afterwards he must recite the phrase,33 Baruch shem k’vod malchuso leolam va’ed, “Blessed be the name of His glorious kingdom forever and ever.”34 This also applies whenever one utters G‑d’s name in vain.35

If the food fell from his hand or the cup spilled36 before he said [the word] “our G‑d” in the blessing, he should continue [and conclude] lamdeini chukecha. Thus it will appear that he is reading a [Scriptural] verse37 and G‑d’s name will not have been recited in vain. This also applies whenever one [inadvertently begins reciting] a blessing in vain and remembers before he mentions the term Elokeinu.

14 [A person should act in the following manner if] he recited a blessing over water and then heard that a person in the neighborhood had died. [At such a time,] it is customary to pour out all the water in the neighborhood that had been drawn.38 [Nevertheless,] he should drink a small amount of the water so that his blessing will not have been recited in vain and then he should pour out the remainder. [This holds true] even according to those who say that the reason for theabove custom is that the Angel of Death places a drop of the blood of death in the water and one who drinks from it endangers himself. Nevertheless, “one who upholds a commandment will not know any evil matter.”39 Once he drinks a little and thus his blessing is no longer in vain, he should pour out the rest because of concern for the danger.

If [after reciting a blessing for water,] one hears that the present momentis the exact moment of the equinox or the solstice,40 he should wait a bit, so that the [exact] moment of the equinox or solstice passes and [only] then drink. For some authorities maintain that it is only dangerous to partake of this water at the [actual] time of the equinox. Even according to the authorities who maintain that it is dangerous to drink the water afterwards, if a piece of iron had not been placed in it at the time of the equinox, [one may,] nevertheless, [rest assured that] “one who upholds a commandment will not know any evil matter.”41

15 A person who pours off a little bit of water before drinking out of concern for harmful water,42 should pour the water off before he recites the blessing and not afterwards, [so as not to] denigrate the blessing.