Netilat Yadayim upon Waking Up and Interruptions between the Bracha and Eating: Difference between pages

From Halachipedia
(Difference between pages)
m (Text replace - "Mishna Berura " to "Mishna Brurah ")
 
 
Line 1: Line 1:
When one wakes up in the morning there is a mitzvah to wash one's hands 3 times with a cup. The details of when and how it should be done are described below:
== Speaking as an interruption==
==Procedure for Washing One's Hands==
# The Gemara [[Brachot]] (40a) mentions the opinion of Rav that one who says to another "take a piece of the bread" before he has a chance to eat himself, may still eat without having to make a new beracha. The same is true for one who tells another to get the salt or dip. However, one who simply talks about unrelated matters would need a new beracha.
# One should wash with a cup or some sort of vessel. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 4:7, Kitzur S"A 2:4, Mishna Brurah 4:15. </ref> If there is no cup, according to Ashkenazim, if one is in an extenuating circumstance and one wants to pray, one may wash without a cup, with a bracha, however, according to Sephardim, if one washes without a cup, such as if one washes directly from the faucet, one shouldn't make a beracha. <ref> Kitzur S"A 2:6 writes that in an extenuating circumstance when there's no cup available and one wants to pray one should wash without a cup with a bracha. However, Rav Mordechai Eliyahu (comments on Kitzur S"A 2:9) writes that if one washes without a cup one shouldn't make the bracha. Halacha Berura 4:12 also writes that if one washes from the faucet one shouldn't make the bracha.</ref>
# Tosfot (there) comment that nowadays people eat their bread without salt. The implication is that asking someone to bring salt after making the beracha would then constitute an interruption, or [[hefsek]], and one may then need a new beracha to eat. Only speech that relates to the piece of bread itself would not be a [[hefsek]]. <ref> By that logic, the salt isn't required for the bread itself. Such appears to be the opinion of the Rashba (Shut HaRashba 1:208) where one was fine having the bread plain. In that way, asking for salt is like ordinary speech, which constitutes a [[hefsek]]. </ref>
# One should wash up to one's wrists. If there's not enough water, it is sufficient to wash up to one's major knuckles (where the finger connects to the hand). <ref> Mishna Brurah 4:9 writes that one should wash up to one's wrists and if there's not enough water, it is sufficient to wash up to one's knuckles. Kitzur S"A 2:3 agrees. Ben Ish Chai (Parashat Toldot #2) writes that one must wash until one's wrists except for on [[Yom Kippur]] and [[Tisha BeAv]] when it is sufficient to wash up to one's knuckles. </ref>
# Rambam (Hilchot [[Berachot]] Perek Alef) writes that anything that relates to the general meal isn't considered a [[hefsek]]. Asking for salt is then not a [[hefsek]], even where one is fine eating the bread without it.
# One should wash one's right hand first, then one's left, and repeat this process two more times so that one washes each hand 3 times. Some say one should wash each hand 4 times. <ref>Mishna Brurah 4:9</ref>
# The Rama (O"C 167:6) and the Beit Yosef (Tur O"C 167) bring from the Kol Bo that ideally one should avoid even such speech. If one did say any of those things, however, he may eat without a new beracha. <ref> Examples of such speech that the Shulchan Aruch gives are: "bring the salt" (MB: even though we don't require one to wait to eat for salt to be brought, since one wants to eat the bread this way, it is considered related to the meal), "give to someone to eat" (MB: even if he is telling them to give someone a separate loaf of bread), "feed the animals" (MB: since this is considered 'related to the meal', because it is forbidden to eat before giving to one's animal). </ref>
# Before pouring the water the filled vessel should be picked up with the right hand and passed to the left hand. <ref> Ben Ish Hai, Toledot, Halacha 1; Kaf HaChaim 4:12 </ref>
# The Sefer HaZikaron L'Gri Weinberg quotes the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that one who took a vow to never eat before reciting a pasuk may say the pasuk after the beracha, if he forgot to do so beforehand and only remembered then. It would therefore not be a [[hefsek]].
# Even a lefty should begin to wash his right hand first.<Ref>Kaf HaChaim 4:35, Artzot HaChaim 4:10, Halacha Brurah 4:22</ref>
==Activities as an Interruption==
# One may not derive benefit from the water that one washed one's hands with.<Ref>Kitzur S"A 2:4</ref>
# One shouldn't hum a tune or say 'nu' or 'sh' between the bracha and eating even they aren't words. After the fact one wouldn't have to make a new bracha.<ref>Vezot Habracha p. 14 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding that 'nu' and 'sh' initially shouldn't be said between the bracha and eating but after the fact aren't an interruption. Minchat Yitzchak 7:9 writes that humming a tune between the hamotzei and eating is a hefsek based on Magen Avraham 124:14 who says that a person should make sure to anaswer the kaddish before v'imru amen if the chazan is extending it with a niggun since the niggun is a hefsek. However, the Shevet Halevi 5:16 argues that a niggun is only a hefsek regarding the kaddish case since imru amen isn't part of kaddish. Also, from Magen Avraham 128:73 and Kiddushin 71a it sounds like a niggun as part of a tefillah isn't a hefsek. He concludes that a niggun isn't a hefsek after the fact.</ref>
# One shouldn't walk between the bracha and eating since walking is an interruption.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Harav 167:9, Shaar Hatziyun 167:28, Vezot Habracha p. 14</ref>
# One shouldn't wink or signal to someone between the bracha and eating but if one did after the fact one shouldn't recite another bracha.<ref>Maamar Mordechai 25:8 cites the Halachot Ketanot 1:57 who held that winking is an interruption but he argues.</ref>
# Some say that an action isn't a hefsek while others hold it is.<Ref>Yabia Omer 5:4:4 cites the Minchat Elazar 1:25 who explained that the Smag and Sefer Hatrumah cited by Bet Yosef 34 who allow using one bracha of tefillin for a pair of Rashi Tefillin and Rabbenu Tam tefillin hold that an action isn't a hefsek. Rashi Eruvin 50a s.v. vhari implies that an action is a hefsek.</ref>


==When should one wash one's hands?==
==If the One Making the Beracha or the Listeners Talk==
# One should wash one's hands immediately after one's recitation of Mode/Moda Ani. <ref> S"A 4:1 </ref>
General rule: Talking about matters '''unrelated to the meal''' constitutes a [[Hefsek]], according to all authorities. One who talks between a beracha and the eating has to recite a new beracha (see case #1 below). The following cases were constructed to demonstrate this rule as it applies by a communal meal. While the discussion is about bread, the same rules apply for all situations of eating. These laws are only by talking that is unrelated to the meal.
# According to Ashkenazim, if one needs to go to the bathroom upon [[waking up]] and after going to the bathroom one will be ready for [[davening]], one should wash without a bracha upon [[waking up]] and after having gone to the bathroom wash again with the bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]]. <ref> Magan Avraham 4:1 quotes the Ketavim as saying that one should wash with the bracha and then go to the bathroom, however, the Magen Avraham writes that he feels that  it's preferable to wash with after going to the bathroom. He adds that if one needs to go to the bathroom, then it's forbidden to wash with a bracha before going to the bathroom. The Kitzur S"A 2:7 and Mishna Brurah 4:4 agree with the Magen Avraham that one should wash with a bracha after going to the bathroom, but they add that one should also wash without a bracha before going to the bathroom. </ref>
# According to Ashkenazim, if after having gone to the bathroom one will still not be ready for [[davening]] and will have to go to the bathroom another time before [[davening]] (as is common when one wakes up a long time before [[davening]]), according to Ashkenazim, one should wash without a bracha upon [[waking up]], wash a second time without a bracha after having gone to the bathroom the first time, and then wash a third time with a bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]] when one is ready for [[davening]] after having gone to the bathroom a second time. Some say that one doesn't need to wash before going to the bathroom and also that after having gone to the bathroom one should wash without a cup and without the bracha, and then when one is ready for [[davening]] one should wash again using a cup and make the bracha. <ref>
* If one is not going to be ready for [[davening]] after having gone to the bathroom the first time, the Biur Halacha (4:1 s.v. Afliu) presents two opinions about when it is preferable to wash one's hands with the bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]]. The Chaye Adam holds that it's preferable to wash without a bracha upon [[waking up]] and when one's ready for [[davening]] to wash again with the bracha, while the Shaarei Teshuva holds that one should wash with the bracha after going to the bathroom even if one isn't totally ready for [[davening]]. The Biur Halacha rules like the Chaye Adam that upon [[waking up]] one should wash without a bracha and when one is ready for [[davening]] to wash again with the bracha.  
* Rav Shlomo Zalman (quoted in Halichot Shlomo ([[Tefilla]] 2:23, pg 23)) rules like the Chaye Adam and states when one is washing one's hands after having gone to the bathroom in the morning if one knows that one will need to go to the bathroom again before [[Davening]], the first time one should wash without a bracha and after going to the bathroom the second time when one is ready for [[davening]] one should wash with the bracha.
* Rav Mordechai Willig in Am Mordechai ([[Brachot]], Siman 11, pg 45-8) writes that one should go to the bathroom, wash without a cup, and then when one is ready for [[davening]] wash again with a cup and make the bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]]. </ref>
# According to Sephardim, one may get dressed, go to the bathroom, and then wash and make the bracha of [[Al Netilat Yadayim]]. However, it's preferable upon [[waking up]] to wash without a bracha and then after having gone to the bathroom to wash again with a Bracha unless one has an urgent need to go to the bathroom in which case one should go to the bathroom before washing one's hands. <Ref> Yalkut Yosef (vol 1, pg 384). Rav Ovadia Yosef in Halichot Olam (v. 1, p. 32) disagrees with the Ben Ish Chai (Toldot #6) who says that one shouldn't touch one's clothes before [[Netilat Yadayim]]. This is quoted by [https://www.dailyhalacha.com/Display.asp?PageIndex=119&ClipID=1521 Rabbi Mansour on dailyhalacha.com]. Halacha Brurah 4:4 writes that if one needs to go to the bathroom one should first go to the bathroom and then wash one's hands with a Bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]]. However, some are strict to wash twice, once before going to the bathroom and once afterward and only make the bracha the second time. If the need to go to the bathroom is urgent then certainly one should go to the bathroom and only wash afterwards. </ref>


==What is permissible before washing hands?==
# It is permissible to say [[Modeh Ani]] before washing hands. <ref> Mishna Brurah 1:8, Kitzur S"A 1:2, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 1:6 </ref>
# It's not permissible to learn or even think Torah before washing one's hands. <ref> Mishna Brurah 1:8, Shulchan Aruch HaRav 1:6 </ref>
# One should wash one's hands before walking 4 [[amot]]. <ref> Mishna Brurah 1:1, Kitzur S"A 2:1. See also Piskei Teshuvot 1:7 who writes that the minhag is that one should wash one's hands even before putting one's feet on the ground. </ref> However some are lenient in this regard. <ref> BeYitzchak Yikrah 1:2 comments that the tradition from the Gra that the Ruach Rah on hands was nullified with the death of Rabbi Avraham the Ger applies only to laws of the Zohar and not the Talmud Bavli and since this law is sourced in the Zohar, there is what to be lenient. </ref>
# If the water if further than 4 [[Amot]] some say that it's better to walk less than 4 [[amot]] at a time while others say it's better to go there quickly if it's still in the same house. <ref> Mishna Brurah 1:2 </ref>
# It’s permitted to get dressed prior to washing one’s hands. <Ref> Yalkut Yosef (vol 1 pg 7), Sh”t Yabia Omer 5:1, Sh”t Otzrot Yosef 1:1 </ref>
# One shouldn't touch any foods before washing his hands. If he did unintentionally, the food should be washed three times. If this is impossible, one should preferably refrain from eating it. If necessary though, one can eat it without washing it. <ref> Yabia Omer 4:1, Otzrot Yosef 1:10 </ref>


==Walking 4 [[amot]] prior to [[Netilat Yadayim]]==
'''Situation:''' There is a family sitting down to a bread meal after washing. The father (or mevarech) makes the beracha on the bread with intent that the beracha should count for the others present, and all present listen to the beracha with kavana to be yotze with the father’s beracha. The listeners are Reuven and Shimon. They answer [[Amen]].  
# It's preferable that one is strict not to walk more than 4 [[amot]] prior to [[Netilat Yadayim]]. <ref>The Tolat Yacov (Seder [[Netilat Yadayim]]) quotes the Zohar saying that it’s forbidden to walk 4 [[amot]] prior to washing [[Netilat Yadayim]]. (1) The Bach (beginning of 4) writes that S”A didn’t quote the Zohar because many people wouldn’t be able to fulfill the law. Sh”t Shevut Yacov 3:1 defends the minhag by saying that either the entire law of the Zohar isn’t applicable since the Talmud Balvi argues on it, or that the entire house is considered within 4 [[amot]]. The Eliyah Rabba 1:4 argues on the Shevut Yacov but defends the minhag by saying that perhaps the law doesn’t apply nowadays. So writes the Lechem Mishna (Shevitat Esor 3:12) and Yam Shel Shlomo (Chullin 31). (2) On the other hand, the Chida (Birkei Yosef 1:1) writes that it’s a serious halacha, most are strict about it, and if the water is far away one should walk less than 4 [[amot]] at a time to get the water. So writes the Shalmei Tzibbur 18c, Chesed LeAlaphim 4:12, Ruach Chaim 4:1, and Petach Dvir 4:1. However, the Shaarei Teshuva 1:2 and Siddur Bet Ovad 6:3 argue that if the water is far away one should rush to get to the water as soon as one can. (3) In conclusion, Sh”t Otzrot Yosef 1:2 writes in name of Rav Ovadyah Yosef that in cases of need one may rely on the lenient opinions especially if one went to sleep after [[chatzot]]. So too, Mishna Brurah 1:2 writes that one may rely on the Shevut Yacov (that a house is like 4 [[amot]]) in cases of great need. </ref>
The following cases are different scenarios that occur after that sequence of events.


==When does one need to wash hands?==
===Listener Talks Immediately===
# Before [[Shacharit]] or [[Mincha]] (specifically the [[Shemoneh Esrei]]) one should wash hands if one had a long interruption between the original washing upon rising. <ref> S"A 92:5 writes that if there was an interruption between the washing upon rising in the morning and praying, one should wash hands if water is available. This is brought down in Yalkut Yosef (Tefilah pg 330). </ref>  If water isn't available one doesn't need to wash one's hands, but only to rub it upon something hard. <ref> Mishna Brurah 92:26 writes that since one can't find water for Stam hands one doesn't need to wash them, but only to rub them against something that can clean them. </ref>
'''Case #1:''' Reuven (the listener) begins to talk before anyone has a chance to eat.  
# If one actually touched a unclean part of the body or went to the bathroom, one must search and find water to wash hands for [[Shemoneh Esrei]]. <ref> Mishna Brurah 92:27 writes that only if one has Stam hands S"A is lenient that one doesn't have to search for water if it isn't around, however if there is a certain impurity such as if one touched an unclean area or went to the bathroom, one certainly must wash hands. Kaf Hachayim 4:86 writes that if he's in the middle of the shemoneh esrei and he realized that he touched something that would obligate him to wash, he should just wipe his hands on "midi diminakei" such as his clothes, wood, or stone. </ref>
# However, just to say [[Brachot]], [[Kriyat Shema]], or learn Torah one doesn't need to wash hands. <ref> Mishna Brurah 92:25 writes that implied from S"A is that only does [[Shemoneh Esrei]] need clean hands but for [[learning Torah]], [[Kriyat Shema]] or [[Brachot]] stam (they are in doubt, they aren't certainly clean or unclean) are sufficient. However, Mishna Brurah also quotes the Pri Megadim 4 writes that [[Kriyat Shema]] does need washed hands. </ref>
# If someone slept in a bed during the day, he should wash [[netilat yadayim]] without a beracha. <ref> Halacha Berura 4:47 </ref>


==Someone who stayed up all night==
# S”A (O”C 167:6) rules that one who talks after the beracha before eating must make a new beracha in order to eat. This applies as well to one who hears the beracha from another in a case where no one has eaten yet (see below for cases where someone has eaten before the talking occurs).
# If one slept less than 30 minutes <ref> Kitzur S”A 2:8, Dinei Nieyor Kol HaLaylah (pg 42) in name of Rav Chaim Kanievsky </ref> or slept in a temporary fashion (putting one’s head on the table, <ref>Ishei Yisrael 2:33 note 110, Piskei Teshuvot </ref>, or on a couch or chair) <ref> Halacha Berura 4:47 </ref> in the morning, one should wash without a Bracha. <Ref> Mishna Brurah 4:27, Ishei Yisrael 2:33, Birkei Yosef 4:5 </ref>
# If one woke up and has in mind to go back to sleep, should wash without a Bracha and then when one wakes up the second time one should wash with a Bracha. <Ref> Piskei Teshuvot 1:6 writes that it’s preferable to wash when one wakes up the first time, however, it’s clear one doesn’t make a Bracha since one’s not ready to daven as in Buir Halacha 4:1 D”H Afilu. Halichot Shlomo ([[Tefillah]] pg 170) agrees. </ref>
# If one woke up in the middle of the night and wants to take a drink, he should preferably wash his hands first, but if this is too difficult he can just wipe his hands on a blanket and then take the drink. <ref> Or Litzion 2:1:8 </ref>
# If one woke up after [[Chatzot]], if one still needs to go to the bathroom before [[davening]], one shouldn’t make the Bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]] until after one went to the bathroom and then it should be said together with [[Brachot HaShachar]], however, if one knows that one doesn’t need to go to the bathroom before [[Davening]], one should make the Bracha of [[Netilat Yadayim]] as close as possible to [[waking up]]. <Ref> Biur Halacha 4:1 D”H Afilu as ruling like the Chaye Adam, Ishei Yisrael 2:31, Dinei Nieyor Kol HaLaylah (pg 42), Halichot Olam 2:23, See Piskei Teshuvot 4:2 who writes that one can go like the Chaye Adam or like the Mekubalim </ref>
# If one washed with a Bracha before [[Olot HaShachar]], one should wash again at Olot without a Bracha. <Ref> S”A 4:14, Mishna Brurah 4:31, Ishei Yisrael 2:31 </ref>
# If one wakes up before [[Chatzot]], one should wash without a Bracha, and then after Olot Hashachar one should dirty one’s hands (by touching a or by going to the bathroom) and then wash with a Bracha. <Ref>Buir Halacha 4:13 D”H Kol, Ishei Yisrael 2:32, Dinei Nieyor Kol HaLaylah (pg 41) </ref>
# If one stayed up all night, one should wash in the morning without a bracha. <ref>{{Ibid}}. The Shulchan Aruch (4:13) writes that there is a doubt whether one makes a Bracha on [[Netilat Yadayim]] on the morning after staying up all night. Similairly, the Rama (ibid) comments that one should do [[netilat Yadayim]] without a Bracha.
* The source of the Shulchan Aruch's doubt is the dispute for doing [[Netilat Yadayim]] in the morning. The Rosh ([[Brachot]] 9:23) says because one's hands are "עסקניות" (literally busy) and they may have touched an unclean part of the body during one's sleep, it's an obligation to do [[Netilat Yadayim]] in the morning. As a support to his view that we wash our hands for cleanliness before [[prayer]] he quotes the pasuk from Tehilim (26:6) "אֶרְחַץ בְּנִקָּיוֹן כַּפָּי ". On the other hand, the Rashba (Teshuvat HaRashba 1:191) argues on the Rosh claiming that there is no source for the idea of the Rosh. Rather the reason is that we are purifying our hands for the whole day (theoretically even to cover washing before bread) and the reason that we do it specifically before [[Shacharit]] is that when we wake up in the morning it's as if we are created anew as it says in Eicha (3:23) חֲדָשִׁים לַבְּקָרִים רַבָּה אֱמוּנָתֶךָ.
* A practical difference (explained by the Bet Yosef (4:13)) that emerges from the dispute is a case of a person that didn't go to sleep at night. According to the Rosh, since one didn't go to sleep there is no doubt that a person would have touched an unclean area and so, there's no need for [[Netilat Yadayim]]. On the other hand, the Rashba holds that since we are created new everyday we need [[Netilat Yadayim]] even if one didn't go to sleep that night. Another concern that compounds the doubt of the Shulchan Aruch is the aspect of רוח רעה that is mentioned by the Tur (4:1) and so, even according to the Rosh one should still need to do [[Netilat Yadayim]]. Nonetheless based on a quote from the Zohar (Vayishlach 169b), the Bet Yosef (ibid) argues that the issue of רוח רעה only applies to the nighttime.
* Rav Ovadiah(Chazon Ovadiah, [[Shavuot]], note 25) mentions that even though the Maharsham (3:126) holds that one even makes a bracha on [[Netilat Yadayim]] of [[Birkat Cohanim]] and going to the bathroom; nevertheless, we don't hold like the Maharsham in this Halacha, says Rav Ovadiah Yosef.
* The Mishna Brurah(4:27) adds that if one indeed went to sleep a שינת קבע (a substantial sleep) on his bed, then one makes [[netilat Yadayim]] with a Bracha.
</ref>


==When to make the bracha==
'''Ruling:''' Reuven needs to make a beracha before eating.
# The minhag is to make the Bracha of Al Netilat Yadiyim between washing and drying one’s hands. <Ref> S”A 158:11 writes that the Bracha of [[Netilat Yadayim]] is like most other [[Brachot]] that have to be made prior to completing the mitzvah. Therefore concludes S”A the practice is to rub one’s hands to clean them (so one can make the Bracha), then make the Bracha prior to washing. However, Mishna Brurah 158:41 writes that the minhag of the world is to make the Bracha after washing but before drying like the Rama writes is permissible. </ref>
# If one forgot to make the Bracha of Al [[Netilat Yadayim]] before drying one’s hands, according to Ashekazim one is permitted to make a Bracha of [[Netilat Yadayim]] until one makes the [[Hamotzei]]. However, Sephardim hold that once one’s hands are totally dry one may not make the Bracha. <Ref> Rama 158:11 writes that if one forgot to make a Bracha before drying one’s hand one can make the Bracha after drying. Mishna Brurah 158:44 supports the Rama by saying that [[Netilat Yadayim]] is different than other [[Brachot]] and may be made after the mitzvah is completed. Mishna Brurah writes that even though the Taz forbids making the Bracha after drying hands, since most achronim hold like the Rama one should act according to the Rama, but one should be careful to avoid such a situation. For Sephardim Ben Ish Chai Shemini:Halacha 7 and Chacham Ovadia Yosef in Halichot Olam 1:page 317 rule that once you dry your hands you can no longer make the beracha. </ref>
==Interruptions (chatzita) Between the Hand and Water==
#Anything that is considered an interruption between the body and water for tevilla is also for [[netilat yadayim]]. The two qualifications that would make it interrupt are that 1. that it covers most of the skin. 2. that it is something you don't want to always be there. <ref> Shulchan Aruch 161:1 based on gemara chullin 106b. </ref>
#Most poskim hold that a ring should be removed, <ref> Shulchan Aruch 161:3, Mishna Brurah 161:17, Iggeros Chazon Ish 1:4. The Rama 161:3 adds that even thoguh some are meikil if the ring is loose, one should be machmir even though water could get through. Kaf Hachayim 161:32 says that if you have an expensive ring that you are afraid to remove, then you can first pour a [[Revi'it]] of water on the right hand where the ring is, then move the ring a little and pour again, but when you move the ring it has to be with a hand that’s already been washed. Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Daad Note 251 footnote 249 says that this requirement to remove the ring is only for washing for a meal, and therefore if the ring is loose you wouldn't need to remove it for the morning [[netilat yadayim]]. According to Mishnah Berurah 161:19, Aruch ha-Shulchan 161:6, and Shu"t Rivevos Ephraim Vol. 1 Siman 127 if someone doesn't remove their ring for anything, then they also wouldn't have to for [[netilat yadayim]]. </ref> but if a loose ting wasn't removed you don't need to repeat the washing. <ref> Mishna Brurah 161:18 </ref>
#One should remove the dirt under his nails before washing his hands. <ref> Ben Ish Chai Kedoshim 24. Shulchan Aruch HaRav 161:4 and Kaf HaChaim 161:4 say that this is only for dirt that is bothersome to somebody and he would usually remove it. </ref>
# If a person has a something that cannot be removed covering his hand (a cast), he should wash the hand hand three times and make the beracha as usual. <ref> Yechave Daat 2:19, Kaf Hachayim 158:4. Aruch Hashulchan 163:2 says that the beracha should not be recited when only one hand is washed even if for a permissible reason. </ref>


==Who is Obligated==
===Listener Talks after the One Who Made the Bracha Eats===
# Women are equally obligated to wash [[netilat yadayim]]. <ref> Pri Megadim (M"Z 4:7), Mishna Brurah 4:10, Kaf Hachayim 4:20, and Halacha Brurah 4:21. Kaf HaChaim points out that in fact, women may have a greater obligation because they have more control over the purity of their houses since they prepare the food and feed the children. </ref>
'''Case #2:''' The father eats a bite of the slice he cut for himself. Reuven and Shimon then break into conversation before eating themselves. 
# There is a difference of opinions when a child should be taught to wash his hands in the morning. Some say that a child of 5 or 6 should be taught, while others say that once the child is able to eat on his own should taught. <ref>
 
*Shulchan Aruch Harav 4:2, Eishel Avraham OC 4, and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach in Halichot Shlomo 20:25 say that the obligation for children to wash begins at the age of [[chinuch]] for other mitzvot which is approximately 5 or 6.  
'''Ashkenazim:'''
*Mishna Brurah 4:10 (based on Pri Megadim 7) says the obligation begins at the time when the child begins to eat on his own.  
# The Rema (167:6) writes that if the mevarech (one making the beracha) eats and then the listeners speak before they get the chance to eat of the bread themselves, the listeners would still be allowed to eat the bread without a new beracha. <ref> The source for this opinion is from the Rokeach (brought down in the Beit Yosef (Tur Siman 167)). Such also seems to be the opinion of the Or Zarua from the Rema above. The logic is that once the mevarech eats of the bread, the beracha counts for all those who wish to be yotze with that beracha, whether they eat of the bread or not. The Rokeach draws the parallel to [[Kiddush]] where the rule is that only the one making [[Kiddush]] is actually required to drink for the [[Kiddush]] to count for all those present at the table. The Beit Yosef, however, responds that the beracha in our case is different. When the mevarech says the Hamotzi, it is as if everyone says Hamotzi by the law of shomea k’oneh (it is as if the listener made the Beracha himself). Each person individually must ensure to eat before talking or else they’ll require a new beracha. [[Kiddush]], on the other hand, is considered a Birkat Hamitzva where one Jew can discharge the obligation of another Jew. In that case, the listener tags along with the one making [[Kiddush]] in terms of the entire mitzvah (i.e. the [[Kiddush]] itself and the subsequent drinking). The Aruch HaShulchan (167:6) defends the side of the Rema by saying that by [[Kiddush]] too, all are required to drink as part of fulfilling [[Kiddush]] on an individual level. Even so, the listeners are yotze with the drinking of the mekadesh. So too, by Hamotzi, when the mevarech obligates himself to eat, the listeners are also yotze with his eating alone. For more discussion, see Yalkut Yosef (167 footnote 5 in detail). </ref>  
*Rav Yaakov Kamenetsky in Emet LeYacov 4:10 says that it begins when a child is old enough to say [[amen]] to a beracha or recite a pasuk in torah.  
# Mishna Brurah (167:43) writes that nearly all the Achronim argue on the Rema (see Be’ur Halacha there and previous reference for the outline of the discussion), and require the listener to make a new Beracha in this case.
*The Kaf Hachayim 4:23 and Ben Ish Chai (Toldot #10) say that even a newborn's hands should be washed by his parents. See further [http://torah.org/advanced/weekly-halacha/5766/lechlecha.html Rabbi Neustadt at torah.org]</ref>
# The Sha’ar Hatzion (there) lists the Achronim who disagree with the Rema and they include: Taz, Magen Avraham, Eliyah Rabbah, Likutei HaPri [[Chadash]], S”A Harav, Chayei Adam, Shiurei Bracha, Halacha Brurah, and possibly the Gra.
# Piskei Teshuvot (167:11) explains that we don’t say Safeik [[Brachot]] L’Hakeil (in doubtful situations of [[Berachot]], we are lenient) in this case, as the Achronim conclude. Therefore, if the listeners talk before eating themselves, they will require a new beracha to eat. <ref> There is a dispute among the authorities surrounding the issue, and one would expect to encounter the rule of safeik [[berachot]] l’hakeil (by a case of doubt by a beracha, one should omit the beracha). The Kaf HaChaim (167 note 58) explains that there is no safeik beracha case here because the listeners didn’t make the beracha themselves. It is true that one who listens to a beracha with intent to be yotze may not subsequently make his own beracha. Even so, as the person in our case is just a listener, he can make the beracha again after accidentally talking without the fear of a beracha l’vatala by the second beracha as the case is slightly different than the case of one who made the beracha himself. See Yalkut Yosef (167 footnote 5) where he argues on this reasoning. </ref>
 
'''Sephardim:'''
# Ben Ish Chai (Emor 16) rules in accordance with the Rema above based on the concept of Safeik [[Berachot]] L’Hakeil. Thus, as long as the mevarech ate before any talking took place, the listeners may and should eat without a new beracha.
# This is also the opinion of the Yalkut Yosef (167:11 in Kitzur S”A) Additionally, he rules that even if another listener ate before the talking, then all may eat the bread without any issue of a [[hefsek]]. One who talked in such a case can also think the beracha in his head before eating as this counts as a beracha for the Rambam and Smag, yet wouldn’t be a beracha l’vatala. <ref> For a lengthy discussion of these rulings in light of the complexity of the issues, see Halichot Olam (vol. 1 pgs. 346-350). </ref>  
 
'''Ruling:''' The consensus for Ashkenazim is that Reuven and Shimon must make a beracha before they eat of the bread. The consensus for Sephardim is that Reuven and Shimon may eat the bread without a new beracha. (Preferably, they should think the beracha before tasting.) Obviously, any at the table who don’t talk are fine according to all opinions.
 
===Listener Talks after Another One of Those Listening Eats===
'''Case #3:''' Shimon goes ahead and eats a bite of his slice. The father hasn’t had a chance to eat yet. (Lechatchilah, Shimon should have waited to eat until his father does (S”A O”C 167:15)). Reuven then begins to talk.
 
'''Ruling:''' Halachically, the case has the same result as in case #2. (see above discussion) For Ashkenazim, Reuven needs a new beracha, whereas for Sephardim, he doesn’t.
 
===One Who Made Bracha Talks Before Anyone Eats===
'''Case #4:''' As the father is cutting a slice for himself, he begins to talk (in matters not related to the meal). No one has had a chance to eat yet. Can the listeners rely on his Beracha?
 
'''Ashkenazim:'''
# Pri Megadim (M.Z. 167:8) rules that where the mevarech talks, the beracha still counts for the others at the table. Therefore, the listeners may go on to eat the bread without any beracha as they didn’t talk. Vezot Habracha p. 15 and Or Letzion 2:12:1 agree.
# Mishna Brurah (167:43) and Be’ur Halacha there disagrees with the Pri Megadim. Mishna Brurah (213:15) only agrees with the Pri Megadim if the one making the bracha spoke accidentally or because of an extenuating circumstance.
# This is also the consensus in Piskei Teshuvot (167:12). He adds that this is only true when the beracha was a good beracha and the talking that followed was accidental. <ref> He also adds that according to the Be’ur Halacha mentioned above, if a listener had eaten before the father had talked, then the other listeners would certainly be fine to eat now. The reasoning is that the beracha is then Chal already by the eating and counts as a legitimate beracha before the [[hefsek]] occurs. As noted above, the father would need a new beracha, even in such a case. </ref>
 
'''Sephardim:'''
# Ben Ish Chai (Emor 16) also brings down that the listeners would be fine to eat the bread now, even though the father had talked.
# This is also the ruling of Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 167:11)
 
'''Ruling:''' The father needs a new beracha, but Reuven and Shimon are fine to eat of the bread without any further beracha.
 
===One Who Made Bracha Talks after Someone Listening Ate===
'''Case #5:''' Reuven quickly takes a bite of his slice before his father has a chance to eat. The father then begins to talk. Shimon hasn’t yet eaten.
 
'''Ashkenazim:'''
# As noted above, whenever one talks before eating, he is obligated to make a new beracha. However, the beracha does count for the listeners who haven’t spoken (see case #4). Piskei Teshuvot 167:12 fnt. 88 says that once the listener ate the bracha isn’t levatala even according to the Mishna Brurah.
 
'''Sephardim:'''
# Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 167:11) rules that once anyone eats of the bread, the beracha takes effect, even for those who subsequently talk. Therefore, '''even the father''' can now eat the bread without another beracha.
 
'''Ruling:''' Shimon can eat of the bread without any issue. The father would require another beracha, only according to Ashkenazim.
 
== Answering Dvarim Sh’B’Kedusha between the Beracha and Eating==
 
# Yalkut Yosef (167) rules that one should certainly not answer [[Kedusha]], [[Kaddish]], or barechu before tasting the food. Doing so would count as a [[hefsek]]. One should also not answer [[Amen]], but if he did so, he would not make a new beracha. <ref> The Kaf HaChaim (206:19) rules that by the word [[Amen]] alone, he creates a [[hefsek]], according to some. However, Yalkut Yosef (167 end of footnote 7) concludes that as long as the response is shorter than “Shalom Alecha Rebbe,” we hold safeik [[berachot]] l’hakeil, and one should continue without a beracha. </ref> Also, if one answered [[Amen]] to his own beracha, he may continue without a new beracha.
# Panim Meirot (brought by the Shaarei Teshuva (167:3)) says that even by [[answering Amen]], one would need to make a new beracha as it constitutes a [[hefsek]] between the beracha and the eating.
# Piskei Teshuvot (167:9) brings the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (see footnote 70 there) that in cases of saying [[Amen]] to another’s beracha or even to one’s own beracha, the person would not need a new beracha. The reason is that we say safeik [[berachot]] l’hakeil in such cases where these matters are disputed by the poskim. [[Answering Amen]] Yeheh Shmei Rabbah and the like is a [[hefsek]] as it is longer than Kedei Dibbur (Shalom Alecha Rebbe). These rules also apply by one who responds to Dvarim Sh’B’[[Kedusha]] during the beracha itself.
# Shemirat [[Shabbat]] K’hilchata (48 footnote 43) writes that if listeners who were yotze with someone then hear the same beracha from another with whom they had no intention to be yotze, they may answer [[Amen]] to the beracha. Obviously, other responses longer than Kedei Dibbur are a [[hefsek]].
==Answering Dvarim Sh'B'Kedusha in the Middle of the Bracha==
# One may not answer Dvarim She'B'kedusha in the middle of a short Bracha, but one should in the middle of a long bracha. However, even for a long bracha after one said the words Baruch Atta Hashem at the end of the bracha one shouldn't interrupt.<ref>Kesef Mishna Tefillah 10:16, Chaye Adam 5:13, Biur Halacha 66:3 s.v. lkadish, Ben Ish Chai Shemot n. 6, Yabia Omer 5:7, Chazon Ovadia Brachot p. 84, [http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1081&pgnum=45 Rivevot Efraim 1:50:5 quoting Rav Moshe Feinstein]</ref>
# For example, in the middle of Asher Yatzar one should answer like one would answer in the middle of Birchot Kriyat Shema such as Kedusha or Kaddish.<ref>[http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1081&pgnum=45 Rivevot Efraim 1:50:5 quoting Rav Moshe Feinstein], Yalkut Yosef 7:15</ref>
 
== Talking before fully swallowing a piece of the bread==
# A person shouldn't talk between eating and swallowing even if he began to chew. If he swallowed some of the taste he can talk.<ref>The Chayei Adam (Klal 49:4) quoted in the Mishna Brurah 167:35 holds that swallowing of the flavor of the food would also be enough for the beracha to fully take effect.</ref> If a person did talk between eating and swallowing one would not recite a new bracha.<ref> Magen Avraham (167:16) raises the possibility that one who talks before fully swallowing may run into an issue of [[hefsek]] by the beracha. However, he leaves the matter unresolved. The issue is that the mechaber poskins (S”A O”C 210:2) that by the case of one simply tasting food without swallowing it, he would not make a beracha on the food. Therefore, there is reason to argue that a beracha is really only relevant by swallowing food. If one then talks to create a [[hefsek]] before swallowing, it may be that he’ll then need a new beracha as by anyone who talks before eating.  
* Mishna Brurah (167:35) also leaves this matter unresolved. Therefore, in the Sha’ar Hatziun (167:30), he warns that one should be very careful in this regard to never talk until fully swallowing. Additionally, the M.B. above implies that one should even avoid [[answering Amen]] and the like before swallowing. He concludes that one should preferably eat a full [[Kezayit]] before talking unless there is a need to talk before getting to that point. The Sha’ar Hatziun (167:28) also warns that one should not walk from place to place before finishing to swallow as walking too constitutes a [[hefsek]]. Walking to another place wouldn’t be a [[hefsek]] in a case where one can’t make a beracha where he is because of a lack of cleanliness. [https://www.yutorah.org/sidebar/lecture.cfm/895272/rabbi-hershel-schachter/berachos-75-39a-over-leassiyasan-shechitah-maaseh-mitzvah-charoses-dropped-the-food/ Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 75 min 0-2)] explained that one should be careful for the Mishna Brurah to swallow before talking. Interestingly, Rashash Nedarim 59a explains why talking after chewing might not be a hefsek.</ref>
# Sephardim hold that one shouldn't speak between the bracha and swallowing but if one hears kaddish or kedusha one may respond since there are opinions who hold that it isn't an interruption once one started to chew the food. If he can't actually answer he should have intent to fulfill his obligation with [[Shomea Koneh]].<ref>Yabia Omer OC 5:16 quotes a number of rishonim that the chewing itself is enough for the beracha to count. Additionally, to alleviate the problem of the Magen Avraham, many Achronim have suggested that as long as one has intention to actually eat, then the chewing is a vital part of the eating. One must by definition chew the food first. Therefore, by the chewing process, the beracha that one made on eating takes effect. However, where one’s intention is just to taste, then a beracha can only be required where he actually swallows more than a [[Kezayit]]. The entire matter is determined by '''intent.''' Therefore, he rules that one should answer [[Kaddish]], [[Kedusha]] and the like. Even so, one should avoid other talking until fully swallowing as many Achronim ruled that it may be problematic. Additionally, by sucking candies, one would only have to swallow some of the flavor to satisfy all opinions as that accomplishes the main eating by a sucking candy. Yalkut Yosef (Brachot p. 167) rules in accordance with the Yabia Omer above that one should preferably not talk while first chewing. If one did so, as long as the palate benefited from the food, he would not require a new beracha. However, he should answer to [[Kaddish]], [[Kedusha]] and the like. If he can’t respond because he is close to swallowing, he should think the [[Amen]] and listen to be yotze the answering of [[Kaddish]] and [[Kedusha]] by shome’a k’oneh.</ref>
 
==Interrupting Between Washing and Eating Bread==
# There is a dispute whether one may not make an interruption between washing and saying [[Hamotzei]]. The halacha is that we are strict not to make an interruption. <ref>Gemara [[Brachot]] 42a, Shulchan Aruch 166:1</ref>
# Initially one should be strict to make [[Hamotzei]] within the time it takes to walk 22 steps. <ref>Rama 166:1</ref>
# After the fact, even if one really made an interruption one does not need to rewash one's hands unless one didn't watch to keep one's hands clean. <ref>Mishna Brurah 166:6</ref>
 
== Answering Baruch Hu U'Varuch Shmo when hearing the Beracha from another==
# There is a large discussion in the poskim if one should answer baruch hu ubaruch shmo to a beracha when you wish to fulfill your obligation. <ref>
*R' Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe O"C 2:98) says that those who wish to fulfill their obligation by hearing another's beracha should not say Baruch Hu U'Varuch Shmo after the name of Hashem. Doing so would require them to make a new beracha.
* R' Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia chelek sheni pg. 127) additionally writes to avoid doing so because of the possible [[hefsek]] involved. The Shulchan Aruch Harav considers it a [[hefsek]], and the Chayei Adam is unsure whether it constitutes a [[hefsek]] or not. For further discussion and a lengthy clarification of the view of the Chida, see Yalkut Yosef (vol. 3 Siman 167 Footnote 5).
* Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Rephael Baruch Toledano, Volume 1, Page 111 says that the Moroccan custom is to answer baruch hu ubaruch shmo even when hearing a beracha that you want to fulfill your obligation with </ref>


==Sources==
==Sources==
<references/>
<references/>
[[Category:Brachot]]

Revision as of 20:43, 13 February 2019

Speaking as an interruption

  1. The Gemara Brachot (40a) mentions the opinion of Rav that one who says to another "take a piece of the bread" before he has a chance to eat himself, may still eat without having to make a new beracha. The same is true for one who tells another to get the salt or dip. However, one who simply talks about unrelated matters would need a new beracha.
  2. Tosfot (there) comment that nowadays people eat their bread without salt. The implication is that asking someone to bring salt after making the beracha would then constitute an interruption, or hefsek, and one may then need a new beracha to eat. Only speech that relates to the piece of bread itself would not be a hefsek. [1]
  3. Rambam (Hilchot Berachot Perek Alef) writes that anything that relates to the general meal isn't considered a hefsek. Asking for salt is then not a hefsek, even where one is fine eating the bread without it.
  4. The Rama (O"C 167:6) and the Beit Yosef (Tur O"C 167) bring from the Kol Bo that ideally one should avoid even such speech. If one did say any of those things, however, he may eat without a new beracha. [2]
  5. The Sefer HaZikaron L'Gri Weinberg quotes the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach that one who took a vow to never eat before reciting a pasuk may say the pasuk after the beracha, if he forgot to do so beforehand and only remembered then. It would therefore not be a hefsek.

Activities as an Interruption

  1. One shouldn't hum a tune or say 'nu' or 'sh' between the bracha and eating even they aren't words. After the fact one wouldn't have to make a new bracha.[3]
  2. One shouldn't walk between the bracha and eating since walking is an interruption.[4]
  3. One shouldn't wink or signal to someone between the bracha and eating but if one did after the fact one shouldn't recite another bracha.[5]
  4. Some say that an action isn't a hefsek while others hold it is.[6]

If the One Making the Beracha or the Listeners Talk

General rule: Talking about matters unrelated to the meal constitutes a Hefsek, according to all authorities. One who talks between a beracha and the eating has to recite a new beracha (see case #1 below). The following cases were constructed to demonstrate this rule as it applies by a communal meal. While the discussion is about bread, the same rules apply for all situations of eating. These laws are only by talking that is unrelated to the meal.


Situation: There is a family sitting down to a bread meal after washing. The father (or mevarech) makes the beracha on the bread with intent that the beracha should count for the others present, and all present listen to the beracha with kavana to be yotze with the father’s beracha. The listeners are Reuven and Shimon. They answer Amen. The following cases are different scenarios that occur after that sequence of events.

Listener Talks Immediately

Case #1: Reuven (the listener) begins to talk before anyone has a chance to eat.

  1. S”A (O”C 167:6) rules that one who talks after the beracha before eating must make a new beracha in order to eat. This applies as well to one who hears the beracha from another in a case where no one has eaten yet (see below for cases where someone has eaten before the talking occurs).

Ruling: Reuven needs to make a beracha before eating.

Listener Talks after the One Who Made the Bracha Eats

Case #2: The father eats a bite of the slice he cut for himself. Reuven and Shimon then break into conversation before eating themselves.

Ashkenazim:

  1. The Rema (167:6) writes that if the mevarech (one making the beracha) eats and then the listeners speak before they get the chance to eat of the bread themselves, the listeners would still be allowed to eat the bread without a new beracha. [7]
  2. Mishna Brurah (167:43) writes that nearly all the Achronim argue on the Rema (see Be’ur Halacha there and previous reference for the outline of the discussion), and require the listener to make a new Beracha in this case.
  3. The Sha’ar Hatzion (there) lists the Achronim who disagree with the Rema and they include: Taz, Magen Avraham, Eliyah Rabbah, Likutei HaPri Chadash, S”A Harav, Chayei Adam, Shiurei Bracha, Halacha Brurah, and possibly the Gra.
  4. Piskei Teshuvot (167:11) explains that we don’t say Safeik Brachot L’Hakeil (in doubtful situations of Berachot, we are lenient) in this case, as the Achronim conclude. Therefore, if the listeners talk before eating themselves, they will require a new beracha to eat. [8]

Sephardim:

  1. Ben Ish Chai (Emor 16) rules in accordance with the Rema above based on the concept of Safeik Berachot L’Hakeil. Thus, as long as the mevarech ate before any talking took place, the listeners may and should eat without a new beracha.
  2. This is also the opinion of the Yalkut Yosef (167:11 in Kitzur S”A) Additionally, he rules that even if another listener ate before the talking, then all may eat the bread without any issue of a hefsek. One who talked in such a case can also think the beracha in his head before eating as this counts as a beracha for the Rambam and Smag, yet wouldn’t be a beracha l’vatala. [9]

Ruling: The consensus for Ashkenazim is that Reuven and Shimon must make a beracha before they eat of the bread. The consensus for Sephardim is that Reuven and Shimon may eat the bread without a new beracha. (Preferably, they should think the beracha before tasting.) Obviously, any at the table who don’t talk are fine according to all opinions.

Listener Talks after Another One of Those Listening Eats

Case #3: Shimon goes ahead and eats a bite of his slice. The father hasn’t had a chance to eat yet. (Lechatchilah, Shimon should have waited to eat until his father does (S”A O”C 167:15)). Reuven then begins to talk.

Ruling: Halachically, the case has the same result as in case #2. (see above discussion) For Ashkenazim, Reuven needs a new beracha, whereas for Sephardim, he doesn’t.

One Who Made Bracha Talks Before Anyone Eats

Case #4: As the father is cutting a slice for himself, he begins to talk (in matters not related to the meal). No one has had a chance to eat yet. Can the listeners rely on his Beracha?

Ashkenazim:

  1. Pri Megadim (M.Z. 167:8) rules that where the mevarech talks, the beracha still counts for the others at the table. Therefore, the listeners may go on to eat the bread without any beracha as they didn’t talk. Vezot Habracha p. 15 and Or Letzion 2:12:1 agree.
  2. Mishna Brurah (167:43) and Be’ur Halacha there disagrees with the Pri Megadim. Mishna Brurah (213:15) only agrees with the Pri Megadim if the one making the bracha spoke accidentally or because of an extenuating circumstance.
  3. This is also the consensus in Piskei Teshuvot (167:12). He adds that this is only true when the beracha was a good beracha and the talking that followed was accidental. [10]

Sephardim:

  1. Ben Ish Chai (Emor 16) also brings down that the listeners would be fine to eat the bread now, even though the father had talked.
  2. This is also the ruling of Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 167:11)

Ruling: The father needs a new beracha, but Reuven and Shimon are fine to eat of the bread without any further beracha.

One Who Made Bracha Talks after Someone Listening Ate

Case #5: Reuven quickly takes a bite of his slice before his father has a chance to eat. The father then begins to talk. Shimon hasn’t yet eaten.

Ashkenazim:

  1. As noted above, whenever one talks before eating, he is obligated to make a new beracha. However, the beracha does count for the listeners who haven’t spoken (see case #4). Piskei Teshuvot 167:12 fnt. 88 says that once the listener ate the bracha isn’t levatala even according to the Mishna Brurah.

Sephardim:

  1. Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 167:11) rules that once anyone eats of the bread, the beracha takes effect, even for those who subsequently talk. Therefore, even the father can now eat the bread without another beracha.

Ruling: Shimon can eat of the bread without any issue. The father would require another beracha, only according to Ashkenazim.

Answering Dvarim Sh’B’Kedusha between the Beracha and Eating

  1. Yalkut Yosef (167) rules that one should certainly not answer Kedusha, Kaddish, or barechu before tasting the food. Doing so would count as a hefsek. One should also not answer Amen, but if he did so, he would not make a new beracha. [11] Also, if one answered Amen to his own beracha, he may continue without a new beracha.
  2. Panim Meirot (brought by the Shaarei Teshuva (167:3)) says that even by answering Amen, one would need to make a new beracha as it constitutes a hefsek between the beracha and the eating.
  3. Piskei Teshuvot (167:9) brings the opinion of Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (see footnote 70 there) that in cases of saying Amen to another’s beracha or even to one’s own beracha, the person would not need a new beracha. The reason is that we say safeik berachot l’hakeil in such cases where these matters are disputed by the poskim. Answering Amen Yeheh Shmei Rabbah and the like is a hefsek as it is longer than Kedei Dibbur (Shalom Alecha Rebbe). These rules also apply by one who responds to Dvarim Sh’B’Kedusha during the beracha itself.
  4. Shemirat Shabbat K’hilchata (48 footnote 43) writes that if listeners who were yotze with someone then hear the same beracha from another with whom they had no intention to be yotze, they may answer Amen to the beracha. Obviously, other responses longer than Kedei Dibbur are a hefsek.

Answering Dvarim Sh'B'Kedusha in the Middle of the Bracha

  1. One may not answer Dvarim She'B'kedusha in the middle of a short Bracha, but one should in the middle of a long bracha. However, even for a long bracha after one said the words Baruch Atta Hashem at the end of the bracha one shouldn't interrupt.[12]
  2. For example, in the middle of Asher Yatzar one should answer like one would answer in the middle of Birchot Kriyat Shema such as Kedusha or Kaddish.[13]

Talking before fully swallowing a piece of the bread

  1. A person shouldn't talk between eating and swallowing even if he began to chew. If he swallowed some of the taste he can talk.[14] If a person did talk between eating and swallowing one would not recite a new bracha.[15]
  2. Sephardim hold that one shouldn't speak between the bracha and swallowing but if one hears kaddish or kedusha one may respond since there are opinions who hold that it isn't an interruption once one started to chew the food. If he can't actually answer he should have intent to fulfill his obligation with Shomea Koneh.[16]

Interrupting Between Washing and Eating Bread

  1. There is a dispute whether one may not make an interruption between washing and saying Hamotzei. The halacha is that we are strict not to make an interruption. [17]
  2. Initially one should be strict to make Hamotzei within the time it takes to walk 22 steps. [18]
  3. After the fact, even if one really made an interruption one does not need to rewash one's hands unless one didn't watch to keep one's hands clean. [19]

Answering Baruch Hu U'Varuch Shmo when hearing the Beracha from another

  1. There is a large discussion in the poskim if one should answer baruch hu ubaruch shmo to a beracha when you wish to fulfill your obligation. [20]

Sources

  1. ↑ By that logic, the salt isn't required for the bread itself. Such appears to be the opinion of the Rashba (Shut HaRashba 1:208) where one was fine having the bread plain. In that way, asking for salt is like ordinary speech, which constitutes a hefsek.
  2. ↑ Examples of such speech that the Shulchan Aruch gives are: "bring the salt" (MB: even though we don't require one to wait to eat for salt to be brought, since one wants to eat the bread this way, it is considered related to the meal), "give to someone to eat" (MB: even if he is telling them to give someone a separate loaf of bread), "feed the animals" (MB: since this is considered 'related to the meal', because it is forbidden to eat before giving to one's animal).
  3. ↑ Vezot Habracha p. 14 quotes Rav Elyashiv as holding that 'nu' and 'sh' initially shouldn't be said between the bracha and eating but after the fact aren't an interruption. Minchat Yitzchak 7:9 writes that humming a tune between the hamotzei and eating is a hefsek based on Magen Avraham 124:14 who says that a person should make sure to anaswer the kaddish before v'imru amen if the chazan is extending it with a niggun since the niggun is a hefsek. However, the Shevet Halevi 5:16 argues that a niggun is only a hefsek regarding the kaddish case since imru amen isn't part of kaddish. Also, from Magen Avraham 128:73 and Kiddushin 71a it sounds like a niggun as part of a tefillah isn't a hefsek. He concludes that a niggun isn't a hefsek after the fact.
  4. ↑ Shulchan Aruch Harav 167:9, Shaar Hatziyun 167:28, Vezot Habracha p. 14
  5. ↑ Maamar Mordechai 25:8 cites the Halachot Ketanot 1:57 who held that winking is an interruption but he argues.
  6. ↑ Yabia Omer 5:4:4 cites the Minchat Elazar 1:25 who explained that the Smag and Sefer Hatrumah cited by Bet Yosef 34 who allow using one bracha of tefillin for a pair of Rashi Tefillin and Rabbenu Tam tefillin hold that an action isn't a hefsek. Rashi Eruvin 50a s.v. vhari implies that an action is a hefsek.
  7. ↑ The source for this opinion is from the Rokeach (brought down in the Beit Yosef (Tur Siman 167)). Such also seems to be the opinion of the Or Zarua from the Rema above. The logic is that once the mevarech eats of the bread, the beracha counts for all those who wish to be yotze with that beracha, whether they eat of the bread or not. The Rokeach draws the parallel to Kiddush where the rule is that only the one making Kiddush is actually required to drink for the Kiddush to count for all those present at the table. The Beit Yosef, however, responds that the beracha in our case is different. When the mevarech says the Hamotzi, it is as if everyone says Hamotzi by the law of shomea k’oneh (it is as if the listener made the Beracha himself). Each person individually must ensure to eat before talking or else they’ll require a new beracha. Kiddush, on the other hand, is considered a Birkat Hamitzva where one Jew can discharge the obligation of another Jew. In that case, the listener tags along with the one making Kiddush in terms of the entire mitzvah (i.e. the Kiddush itself and the subsequent drinking). The Aruch HaShulchan (167:6) defends the side of the Rema by saying that by Kiddush too, all are required to drink as part of fulfilling Kiddush on an individual level. Even so, the listeners are yotze with the drinking of the mekadesh. So too, by Hamotzi, when the mevarech obligates himself to eat, the listeners are also yotze with his eating alone. For more discussion, see Yalkut Yosef (167 footnote 5 in detail).
  8. ↑ There is a dispute among the authorities surrounding the issue, and one would expect to encounter the rule of safeik berachot l’hakeil (by a case of doubt by a beracha, one should omit the beracha). The Kaf HaChaim (167 note 58) explains that there is no safeik beracha case here because the listeners didn’t make the beracha themselves. It is true that one who listens to a beracha with intent to be yotze may not subsequently make his own beracha. Even so, as the person in our case is just a listener, he can make the beracha again after accidentally talking without the fear of a beracha l’vatala by the second beracha as the case is slightly different than the case of one who made the beracha himself. See Yalkut Yosef (167 footnote 5) where he argues on this reasoning.
  9. ↑ For a lengthy discussion of these rulings in light of the complexity of the issues, see Halichot Olam (vol. 1 pgs. 346-350).
  10. ↑ He also adds that according to the Be’ur Halacha mentioned above, if a listener had eaten before the father had talked, then the other listeners would certainly be fine to eat now. The reasoning is that the beracha is then Chal already by the eating and counts as a legitimate beracha before the hefsek occurs. As noted above, the father would need a new beracha, even in such a case.
  11. ↑ The Kaf HaChaim (206:19) rules that by the word Amen alone, he creates a hefsek, according to some. However, Yalkut Yosef (167 end of footnote 7) concludes that as long as the response is shorter than “Shalom Alecha Rebbe,” we hold safeik berachot l’hakeil, and one should continue without a beracha.
  12. ↑ Kesef Mishna Tefillah 10:16, Chaye Adam 5:13, Biur Halacha 66:3 s.v. lkadish, Ben Ish Chai Shemot n. 6, Yabia Omer 5:7, Chazon Ovadia Brachot p. 84, Rivevot Efraim 1:50:5 quoting Rav Moshe Feinstein
  13. ↑ Rivevot Efraim 1:50:5 quoting Rav Moshe Feinstein, Yalkut Yosef 7:15
  14. ↑ The Chayei Adam (Klal 49:4) quoted in the Mishna Brurah 167:35 holds that swallowing of the flavor of the food would also be enough for the beracha to fully take effect.
  15. ↑ Magen Avraham (167:16) raises the possibility that one who talks before fully swallowing may run into an issue of hefsek by the beracha. However, he leaves the matter unresolved. The issue is that the mechaber poskins (S”A O”C 210:2) that by the case of one simply tasting food without swallowing it, he would not make a beracha on the food. Therefore, there is reason to argue that a beracha is really only relevant by swallowing food. If one then talks to create a hefsek before swallowing, it may be that he’ll then need a new beracha as by anyone who talks before eating.
    • Mishna Brurah (167:35) also leaves this matter unresolved. Therefore, in the Sha’ar Hatziun (167:30), he warns that one should be very careful in this regard to never talk until fully swallowing. Additionally, the M.B. above implies that one should even avoid answering Amen and the like before swallowing. He concludes that one should preferably eat a full Kezayit before talking unless there is a need to talk before getting to that point. The Sha’ar Hatziun (167:28) also warns that one should not walk from place to place before finishing to swallow as walking too constitutes a hefsek. Walking to another place wouldn’t be a hefsek in a case where one can’t make a beracha where he is because of a lack of cleanliness. Rav Schachter (Brachot Shiur 75 min 0-2) explained that one should be careful for the Mishna Brurah to swallow before talking. Interestingly, Rashash Nedarim 59a explains why talking after chewing might not be a hefsek.
  16. ↑ Yabia Omer OC 5:16 quotes a number of rishonim that the chewing itself is enough for the beracha to count. Additionally, to alleviate the problem of the Magen Avraham, many Achronim have suggested that as long as one has intention to actually eat, then the chewing is a vital part of the eating. One must by definition chew the food first. Therefore, by the chewing process, the beracha that one made on eating takes effect. However, where one’s intention is just to taste, then a beracha can only be required where he actually swallows more than a Kezayit. The entire matter is determined by intent. Therefore, he rules that one should answer Kaddish, Kedusha and the like. Even so, one should avoid other talking until fully swallowing as many Achronim ruled that it may be problematic. Additionally, by sucking candies, one would only have to swallow some of the flavor to satisfy all opinions as that accomplishes the main eating by a sucking candy. Yalkut Yosef (Brachot p. 167) rules in accordance with the Yabia Omer above that one should preferably not talk while first chewing. If one did so, as long as the palate benefited from the food, he would not require a new beracha. However, he should answer to Kaddish, Kedusha and the like. If he can’t respond because he is close to swallowing, he should think the Amen and listen to be yotze the answering of Kaddish and Kedusha by shome’a k’oneh.
  17. ↑ Gemara Brachot 42a, Shulchan Aruch 166:1
  18. ↑ Rama 166:1
  19. ↑ Mishna Brurah 166:6
  20. ↑
    • R' Moshe Feinstein (Iggerot Moshe O"C 2:98) says that those who wish to fulfill their obligation by hearing another's beracha should not say Baruch Hu U'Varuch Shmo after the name of Hashem. Doing so would require them to make a new beracha.
    • R' Ovadia Yosef (Chazon Ovadia chelek sheni pg. 127) additionally writes to avoid doing so because of the possible hefsek involved. The Shulchan Aruch Harav considers it a hefsek, and the Chayei Adam is unsure whether it constitutes a hefsek or not. For further discussion and a lengthy clarification of the view of the Chida, see Yalkut Yosef (vol. 3 Siman 167 Footnote 5).
    • Kitzur Shulchan Aruch of Rav Rephael Baruch Toledano, Volume 1, Page 111 says that the Moroccan custom is to answer baruch hu ubaruch shmo even when hearing a beracha that you want to fulfill your obligation with
Retrieved from "http://localhost:80/index.php?title=Netilat_Yadayim_upon_Waking_Up&oldid=22470"