16,374
edits
Interruptions between the Bracha and Eating: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
Interruptions between the Bracha and Eating (view source)
Revision as of 20:43, 13 February 2019
, 13 February 2019→Answering Dvarim Sh'B'Kedusha in the Middle of the Bracha
| (6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
# 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 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> | # 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> | |||
==If the One Making the Beracha or the Listeners Talk== | ==If the One Making the Beracha or the Listeners Talk== | ||
| Line 17: | Line 18: | ||
The following cases are different scenarios that occur after that sequence of events. | 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. | '''Case #1:''' Reuven (the listener) begins to talk before anyone has a chance to eat. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 25: | ||
'''Ruling:''' Reuven needs to make a beracha before eating. | '''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. | '''Case #2:''' The father eats a bite of the slice he cut for himself. Reuven and Shimon then break into conversation before eating themselves. | ||
| Line 39: | Line 40: | ||
'''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. | '''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. | '''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. | '''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? | '''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:''' | '''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. | # 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. | # 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> | # 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> | ||
| Line 58: | Line 59: | ||
'''Ruling:''' The father needs a new beracha, but Reuven and Shimon are fine to eat of the bread without any further beracha. | '''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. | '''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:''' | '''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). | # 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:''' | '''Sephardim:''' | ||
| Line 69: | Line 70: | ||
'''Ruling:''' Shimon can eat of the bread without any issue. The father would require another beracha, only according to Ashkenazim. | '''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 | == 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. | # 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. | ||
| Line 75: | Line 76: | ||
# 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. | # 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]]. | # 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== | == Talking before fully swallowing a piece of the bread== | ||
