Interruptions to a Bracha
Jump to navigation Jump to search
When is a new Bracha Rishona required?
- As long as one didn’t have a interruption in one's train of thought (Hesech Hadaat), which will be clarified below, one doesn’t need to make a new Bracha Rishona. However, if one made a Bracha Achrona, and one wants to eat again a new Bracha Rishona is needed.
- If one if planning on having coffee or tea for a length of time as one sits and learns, one Shehakol covers all the cups one drinks even there’s a long break between cups. 
- If one made a Bracha Rishona and waited 72 minutes one doesn’t need to make another Bracha Rishona. 
- If one made a Bracha Achrona only because one was afraid that Shuir Ikul would pass and one has intent to continue eating afterwards, one doesn’t need a new Bracha Rishona when one continues to eat. 
- One who went to the bathroom in the middle of a snack need not recite a new bracha upon returning. 
- If someone fell asleep in a temporary fashion it isn't considered an interruption for a bracha. If one went to sleep on one's bed it is considered an interruption. Falling asleep in one's chair is generally considered a temporary sleep and isn't considered an interruption.
- If one davened in the middle of a snack the davening isn't considered an interruption to the bracha rishona. Some disagree.
Interruption of a Bread Meal
- If one Davened in middle of a meal it’s not considered an interruption.
- Sleeping in middle of a meal isn’t considered an interruption except that one needs to wash Netilat Yadayim. 
- During a meal, if one touches areas of one's body which are supposed to be covered, one should wash Netilat Yadayim without a Bracha. 
- Someone who went to the bathroom during a meal isn’t considered an interruption rather one should just make Netilat Yadayim and Asher Yatzer afterwards. 
- If one said Shir HaMaalot it is not considered an interruption of the meal.
- Washing Mayim Achronim is considered an interruption of the meal and if one wants to eat afterwards one should recite a new bracha rishona and wash Mayim Achronim again. Ideally a person should not interrupt between the first Mayim Achronim and the Birkat Hamazon.
- Reciting the Zimmun is considered an interruption of the meal and if one wants to drink afterwards one should recite a new bracha rishona. Some say that food and drinks are the same for this halacha, while others say that food would not require a new bracha rishona after zimmun even though drinks would.
- If a person thought that he finished eating because he didn't see that he had more of that type of food and then found more of that food there is a dispute whether or not a person is required to recite a new bracha rishona.
- Beiur Halacha 190 s.v. Acher, Vezot HaBracha (pg 53, chapter 5)
- Sh”t Yechave Daat 6:11, Sh”t Yabia Omer O”C 6:27, Sh”t Chazon Ovadyah 1:18, Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 224)
- Yalkut Yosef (vol 3, pg 227)
- Yalkut Yosef (Kitzur S”A 178:18)
- Rama O.C. 178:7. Even though the Biur Halacha 178:7 writes that for a non-bread meal going to the bathroom would be an interruption, the Piskei Teshuvot 178:7 holds that nowadays when we have bathrooms indoors we don't recite a new bracha after going to the bathroom. Regarding Sephardim, even though Rav Ovadia Yosef (Halichot Olam (vol 1 pg 44) and codified in Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 330)) held that one should recite a bracha if one goes to the bathroom in the middle of a meal, later he retracted as is recorded in Yalkut Yosef (Brachot 5771 version, 178:26). Halacha Brurah 178:23 agrees.
- Shulchan Aruch OC 178:7 from Rosh Tanit, Halachos of Brachos p. 130
- Dirshu 178:37 citing Rav Sheinberg (Chidushei Batra)
- Tosfot Pesachim 102a s.v. vikru, Rosh Pesachim 10:24, and Shulchan Aruch O.C. 178:7 establish that davening isn't a hefsek to a meal. Kaf Hachaim 178:38 and Piskei Teshuvot 178:20 apply this to a snack just like a bread meal. The Taz 178:10 has an entirely different approach that rejects the Tosfot and Rosh and follows the opinion of Rabbenu Yom Tov that davening is a hefsek unless one left some of one's group at the first place.
- Aruch Hashulchan 178:15 writes that davening isn't considered an interruption for a bread meal but for other foods it is an interruption.
- Tosfot Pesachim 102a s.v. vaakru proves from the gemara that if a party left the house to daven it isn't considered an interruption of a meal that davening in the middle of a meal isn't considered an interruption at all. Even though one can't eat while one is davening, nonetheless, it isn't an interruption. Rosh Pesachim 10:24, Shulchan Aruch O.C. 178:7, and Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 228) codify this. Shaar Hatziyun 178:42 accepts Shulchan Aruch and rejects the approach of Taz 178:10 who partially is interested in rejecting the Tosfot based on Rif Pesachim 24a.
- Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 229)
- Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 331)
- Yalkut Yosef (vol 3 pg 330)
- Piskei Teshuvot 179:4
- Shulchan Aruch O.C. 179:1, Magen Avraham 179:2, Taz 179:1, Mishna Brurah 179:2
- Shulchan Aruch O.C. 179:1
- Rav Poalim OC 2:34 based on Tevuot Shor 19:32 who thinks it isn't a hefsek and Mizbe'ach Adama 1d who thinks it is a hefsek.