Home

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 183:9) rules that one must sit down with a sense of reverence to recite Birkat Hamazon, even if one was previously standing or walking. Furthermore, it says (ibid:12) that one is forbidden from performing any acts of labor while reciting Birkat Hamazon. The Mishna Berura (O.H. 183:37), citing another Halacha in the Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 191:3), clarifies that one must stop what one is doing while reciting not only Birkat Hamazon, but rather for all blessings.

The Ben Ish Hai  (Year A, Parashat Hukat, § 8) says that one should not only refrain from outright acts of labor, such as cutting wood and the like, but even seemingly benign acts, as it shows a lack of reverence for the blessing being recited. Examples of such acts given by the Ben Ish Hai include drying one’s hands, putting on clothing, waving or hinting with one’s eyes or lips. The Taz (O.H. 191) says that one should not even engage in Torah study, such as contemplating a Torah thought or looking in a book, while reciting a blessing. Interestingly, Rabbi Yosef Haim Sonnenfeld (Shu”t Salmat Haim, § 155) permits folding of one’s Talit during the Shir Shel Yom or later parts of the prayer.

Parenthetically, in light of the aforementioned Halacha, one may question the Shulhan Aruch’s (Orah Haim 63:7) ruling that one must stop one’s work to recite the first paragraph of Keriat Shema, but may continue working while reciting the second and third paragraphs. The Pri Megadim (Mishbetzot Zahav, § 63:1) explains that the essence of the Mitzvah of Keriat Shema is contained in the first paragraph, while the last two paragraphs have more of a status of Torah study. Performing labor is permitted while learning Torah and this explains the leniency regarding workers who may continue to work while reciting the second and third paragraphs of the Shema.

Summary: One should not be involved in any other acts while reciting a blessing.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 184:5) rules that one may recite Birkat Hamazon as long as one is still satiated from that meal and does not feel hungry. This ruling applies to other Berachot Aharonot (after–blessings) for other foods as well. Since the sensation of satiety and hunger are subjective, the Mishna Berura (O.H. 184:20) writes that commonly accepted custom of the Aharonim is that one has 72 minutes to recite a Beracha Aharona, including “Asher Yatzar”.

It should be noted that Beracha Rishona and Beracha Aharona are not necessarily linked with regards to time limits. For example, if one does not recite Birkat Hamazon within the 72-minute window and loses the opportunity to recite it, it is plausible that one can eat more bread without having to recite “Hamotzi”. This refers only to a case in which one does not takes one’s mind off the bread and thus it would apply to any future bread. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (Hazon Ovadia, Hilchot Berachot) gives an example of one who recites “Shehakol” for tea while one spends the day learning; even though one may have surpassed the 72-minute window for the Beracha Aharona, one may continue drinking throughout one’s learning so long as one does not take one’s mind off the tea.

Although the general consensus is 72 minutes with regards to Beracha Aharona, it is plausible that one could begin to feel hungry even before this time. Indeed, the Kaf HaHaim explains that the limit to recite Birkat Hamazon is actually only thirty minutes. Furthermore, strictly speaking,  one may recite Birkat Hamazon on bread if one still feels satiated, even beyond 72 minutes, whereas one would need to recite a Beracha Aharona on other foods before 72 minutes. If one is unsure about one’s satiety, then one can certainly rely on the 72 minutes. If one is sure that one is hungry after eating but is still within the 72 minutes, it is recommended that one eat some more and then make a Beracha Aharona or Birkat Hamazon. Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul (Or LeZion, vol.II), however, says that, since the parameters of Beracha Aharona are unclear, one should preferably make a Beracha Aharona or Birkat Hamazon as soon as one is done eating.

Summary: The commonly accepted practice is that one may recite Birkat Hamazon or any other Beracha Aharona within 72 minutes of consuming the food or drink.

Whereas the vast majority of blessings are rabbinic in origin, the obligation to recite Birkat Hamazon has its source in the Torah. Regarding biblical commandments, there is a concept of “Safek DeOraita LeHumra”, that in cases of doubt, one must be stringent in their performance.  So too with Birkat Hamazon, one would need to be stringent and repeat its recital if one were unsure if it was recited or not.  Additionally, regarding the section of “RetzeVehahalitzenu” that is added on Shabbat, if one recited Birkat Hamazon and is certain that one forgot this addition, one would need to repeat Birkat Hamazon.

There is a discussion, however, if one is unsure as to whether or not “Retze” was recited. Rabbi Shalom Messas (Tevuot Shamesh, Orah Haim, § 39) explains that in such a case, one knows that one recited Birkat Hamazon, which is a biblical obligation but is only in doubt about “Retze“, which is a rabbinic obligation. Following the principle of “Safek Derabanan Lekula”-that in cases of doubt involving rabbinic commandments, one may be lenient-he says that one need not repeat Birkat Hamazon. Other rabbis, including Rabbi Ya’akov Orenstein (Yeshuot Ya’akov, 422:3), side with this position, and explain that since one normally sings special songs for Shabbat during the meal and do other things unique to Shabbat, one most likely made a point of reciting “Retze” in Birkat Hamazon.

Conversely, the Mishna Berura (O.H. 188:16) rules strictly and says that if one was unsure if one recited “Retze“, one would need to repeat Birkat Hamazon. The Mishna Berura’s reasoning is that, since one recites the regular weekday Birkat Hamazon more often, one most likely recited the regular version on Shabbat without “Retze“. In his approbation to Rabbi Messas’ Tevuot Shamesh, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef cites the Besamim Rosh (§ 287), who uses the same logic as the Mishna Berura and rules that one would need to repeat Birkat Hamazon. Nevertheless, Rav Ovadia concludes by saying that this ruling needs further analysis, and elsewhere (Yabia Omer, vol. VII, Orah Haim, § 28) he rules like Rabbi Messas on a similar matter. Rabbi David Yosef (Halacha Berura, Hilchot Birkat Hamazon) also concurs with this opinion.

Summary: If one is unsure if one recited “Retze Vehahalitzenu” on Shabbat, one need not repeat Birkat Hamazon.

The Gemara (Berachot 46a) discusses the importance of a guest reciting Birkat HaOre’ah, a special prayer in Birkat Hamazon for one’s host when eating at the latter’s home, and this is codified in the Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 201:1). The Shulhan Aruch goes on to state that this prayer is so important that the guest should be the one to recite Birkat Hamazon on everyone’s behalf so that he or she may recite the Birkat HaOre’ah. In previous generations, one person would recite it on behalf of the participants of the meal, and they would fulfill their obligation by listening. Nevertheless, even nowadays when Birkat Hamazon is recited individually by participants of a meal, the Mishna Berura (O.H. 201:4) it is preferable for the guest to lead the Zimun. Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul (Or LeZion, vol. II, ch.46, § 33) writes that Yeshiva students should recite Birkat HaOre’ah during Birkat Hamazon and have in mind those people who donated money towards the meals. One can also apply this opinion to congregants who eat Seuda Shelishit or breakfast, etc. at synagogue, and have in mind the sponsors of the meal. Furthermore, if one does not understand or has a hard time reading Birkat HaOre’ah, one is permitted to recite it in one’s own language. Birkat HaOre’ah is merely an appended prayer and is not a formal part of the actual Birkat Hamazon, and as such, although reciting it in the language of our Sages is ideal, one is certainly allowed to recite in one’s own language. It should be noted that the wording of Birkat HaOre’ah found in authentic Moroccan books is slightly different from that found in the Gemara, but for all intents and purposes, the overarching theme is identical. Summary:   There is special importance to reciting Birkat HaOre’ah.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 202:7) rules that if dates are mashed and thus change form, the blessing would still be “Bore Peri Ha’Etz”. On the other hand the Rama (ibid.) says that the blessing for such a dish would be “Shehakol”. Rav Ovadia Yosef (Yabia Omer, vol. VII, § 29) sides with the Shulhan Aruch and says that even when a fruit or vegetable changes from its original form, it retains the blessing of that food. Normally, the principle of “Safek Berachot Lehakel”-that one should be lenient when there is a doubt regarding blessings-would dictate that one should recite the generic blessing of “Shehakol” on a questionable food such as mashed dates. Nevertheless, Rav Ovadia’s rationale is that even those that follow the opinion of the Rama would agree that one would fulfill one’s obligation Bediavad (ex post facto) by reciting the original blessing of the fruit or vegetable.

Notwithstanding, there are Moroccan rabbis who explain that the blessing overcrushed fruits or vegetables is “Shehakol”. Rabbi Eliezer de Avila (Ma’ayan Ganim, Orah Haim, § 202) discusses marzipan, which is a paste made of crushed almonds, and says that its blessing would be “Shehakol“. This is also the position of Rabbi Yosef Messas (Mayim Haim, vol. I, § 284) and Rabbi Baruch Toledano (Kitzur Shulhan Aruch, § 199:25).

It should be noted that the blessing of “Shehakol” only applies if the fruit or vegetable lost any semblance of its original form, but if the general formremains, then it would retain its original blessing. As such, there is a discussion regarding the appropriate blessing that should be recited over the well known potato chips Pringles. On one hand, Pringles chips are made by mashing potatoes and therefore should necessitate a “Shehakol” blessing. On the other hand, the individual chips appear to be like slices of potato, and thus some opinions say that the blessing would revert back to the original “Bore Peri Ha’adama”. Practically speaking, since there is a doubt, one should recite “Shehakol” on Pringles.

Summary: The Moroccan custom is that “Shehakol” is recited over fruitsand vegetables which change form, such as being mashed, crushed, etc.    

The Tosefta (Kelaim 3:13) defines a tree, for the purposes of reciting “Bore PeriHaEtz”, as a plant whose fruit come off of branches which emerge from the trunk. Even after the fruit are picked, the branches remain and give new fruits in the subsequent seasons. Fruits and vegetables whose blessing is “Bore PeriHaAdama”, however, grow off of stalks that originate directly in the trunk and are replaced year to year. The Bet Yosef (Orah Haim § 203) defines a tree as a plant which produces fruit annually, whereas a plants requiring “Bore PeriHaAdama” are those whose roots do not remain and need to be planted every year. With regards to bananas, the banana “tree” has stalks which emerge from the roots and are replaced annually, although the roots remain from year to year.  Despite its ambiguous status, the Vilna Gaon writes that Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 203:3) follows the Tosefta’s definition and rules that the blessing for a banana is “Bore Peri HaAdama”.

The Moroccan Poskim discuss this ambiguity and whether the blessing of “HaAdama” is recited because in cases of doubt, “HaAdama” fulfils the obligation of fruit that are really “HaEtz”, or whether the banana plant really is considered “HaAdama”. Rabbi Yosef Messas (Shu”t Mayim Haim, § 56) offers a novel analysis and suggests that the blessing over a banana should actually be “Shehakol”. He quotes the Or HaHaim Hakadosh, Rabbi Haim Ben Attar (Sefer Rishon LeZion), who writes that whenever there is doubt as to the blessingstatus of a fruit, the generic blessing of “Shehakol” is to be recited. Even though “HaAdama” normally exempts fruit which are “HaEtz” (since, ultimately, all fruit originate from the ground), the Or HaHaim follows the Rambam, who rejects this exemption, and therefore says that “Shehakol” is preferable. Rabbi Shalom Messas (Shemesh Umagen, vol. II, § 11) defends the logic of his uncle, Rabbi Yosef, but writes that the Moroccan custom is to follow the Shulhan Aruch’s ruling and recite “Bore Peri HaAdama” over bananas.

Papaya’s grow in a similar fashion to bananas and are subject to the same ambiguity as bananas, but the Halacha is that their blessing is also “HaAdama”. Nevertheless, one difference is that papaya plants give fruit within three yearsof planting. Jewish law dictates that fruit from true trees cannot be consumedwithin the first three years of a tree’s life and such fruit are called “Orlah”. Since the custom is to be strict with regards to Orlah in Israel, Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv explains that, despite its questionable status as a tree, for the purposes of Orlah one should be strict and refrain from eating papayas grown in Israel within the first three years. Nevertheless, Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul (Or LeZion, vol. II, pg. 306) says that since the custom is to bless “HaAdama”, we consider the fruit grow from a ground plant and not a tree. As such, he rules that one would be able to eat papayas grown in Israel, even within three years.

Additionally, it should be noted that all berries, with the exception of strawberries, are considered to be “HaEtz”. Strawberries grow from stalks from the ground and their blessing is thus “HaAdama”.

Summary:  The blessing over bananas and papayas is “Bore PeriHaAdama”. Papayas from a plant that is under three years old are notconsidered Orlah in Israel and may be consumed. The blessing over allberries is “Bore Peri HaEtz”, except for strawberries, whose blessing is “HaAdama”.

The Gemara (Berachot 36a) discusses the blessing for hearts of palm, the soft inner core of palm stems, and concludes that it should be “Shehakol”, and not “HaAdama”. The rationale is that palm trees are not grown specifically to harvest the inner core of the stems but rather that they are a byproduct. Nowadays, there is an industry around growing palm plants specifically to harvest the hearts, and many Poskim rule that the blessing is not “Shehakol”. Rabbi Moshe Heinemann of the Star-K suggests that, since the main “fruits” of these young palm trees are the hearts, the blessing is not even “HaAdama”, like one opinion of the Gemara, but rather “HaEtz”.  Nevertheless, since heart of palm in not an actual fruit but rather a component of the stem, which happens to be edible, practically speaking the blessing is “HaAdama”. One proof for this approach is that the Ramban (Berachot 30b) explains that, although sugarcane is grown specifically for sugar, after all, the sugar that is consumed is not a fruit, but rather a product of the actual cane, and its blessingis “HaAdama”. Furthermore, the Kol Bo (end of § 204) discusses an edible flower, which although emerges from the branches of a tree like a fruit, it is considered to be a part of the structure of the tree and its blessing would aso be “HaAdama”. Yet another proof is the Mishna Berura (Sha’ar HaTziyun, O.H. 202:42) which says that any part of a tree which is not the formal fruit but rather a component of the tree, would have the blessing of “HaAdama”. Additionally, Rabbi Ilowitz, the Av Bet Din of Sao Paulo, where hearts of palm are grown, says (Birurim § 30 to Vezot HaBeracha) concurs that the proper blessing is not “HaEtz” but “HaAdama”.

The Gemara also discusses the caper bush which has several edible parts, including the actual capers, which are used as a condiment. The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 202:6) rules that the blessing for the capers is “HaEtz”.

Summary:   The blessing for heart of palm is “Bore Peri HaAdama”. The blessing for capers is “Bore Peri HaEtz”.

There is a concept in the area of blessings over foods known as Ikar and Tafel, or primary and secondary foods. In other words, foods have different levels of Halachic importance and in some cases, reciting a blessing over a food which is considered more important can exempt a different type of food which is eatenalong with it. In such a case, the former food would be considered Ikar, or primary, and the exempted food is secondary to it, or Tafel. One example is a bowl of cereal, in which the cereal’s blessing is “HaAdama” and the milk is “Shehakol”, one would only have to recite a blessing on the Ikar-the cereal-and that would exempt the milk. Another example is a rice dish with meat mixed into it. The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 208:7) rules that whenever two foods are mixed together, that which is in the majority is considered Ikar. As such, it would seem as though the rice would be considered Ikar. Nevertheless, the Shulhan Aruch refers to food which are very similar (such as rice flour and millet flour) and in the case of the rice dish, the rice and meat are unique entities. Furthermore, the meat is the main satiating component of the mixture, whereas the rice acts as a filler, and therefore, the meat would be considered Ikar and a “Shehakol” blessing would be sufficient for the entire dish. One contemporary application of this concept is sushi. On one hand, the majority of a serving of sushi is rice, suggesting that the blessing should be “Mezonot”. On the other hand, many people eat sushi particularly for the fish meat contained within, and thus “Shehakol” would need to be recited instead. If one’s intention in eating the sushi was for the rice, then one would recite“Mezonot”. Another example is in a vegetable-containing couscous dish. If the couscousand vegetables are mixed together, then “Mezonot” should be recited because the Halacha is that a grain-based food is always Ikar. However, there is disagreement among the Moroccan Poskim when the couscous and the vegetable are separate. Rabbi Yosef Berdugo (Shufre DeYosef, § 20) rules that since reciting “Mezonot” may possibly exempt the vegetables even though the foods are separate, one should recite “HaAdama” first on the vegetables and then “Mezonot” on the couscous. Rabbi Yosef Messas (Otzer HaMichtavim, vol. III, § 1781), however, says that the vegetables and couscous are unquestionably considered to be separate and that one could recite “Mezonot” first on the couscous. Summary:   One should recite a blessing over whichever component of sushi that one specifically desires. When couscous and vegetables are eaten together but are not mixed, one may recite “Mezonot” or “HaAdama” in any order.

As mentioned previously, whenever two types of food are mixed together, that which is in the majority or which is the principal part, is considered Ikar, and one would only recite the blessing specific to that food. Nevertheless, grain-based foods, whose blessing is “Mezonot”  are considered to be a staple of one’s diet and as such are generally considered Ikar, even if they are in the minority or are not the prominent part of a dish.  The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 204:12) says that one caveat to this rule is if the Mezonot is in the minority and does not appreciably enhance the overall dish, such as flour which is used for consistency or adhesion. One example of such a food is licorice, which contains flour that is used simply for consistency, and therefore its blessing would not be “Mezonot” but rather “Shehakol”. A slightly different example is schnitzel, in which the Mezonot is not the majority, but to some extent enhances the taste of food. Indeed, some Poskim rule that the blessing over schnitzel is “Mezonot”. Other Poskim follow the opinions of the Meiri and the Rosh, who say that the blessing would be “Mezonot” only when the grain-based component is the prominent part of the food, and in schnitzel, the breading is more akin to a spice or condiment. Rabbi Ben Zion Abba Shaul (Or Lezion, pg. 125) makes a distinction with regards to the thickness of the breading, with thickly breaded schnitzel having the blessing of “Mezonot” and thinly breaded schnitzel being “Shehakol”. Nonetheless, the normative opinion is that the chicken is the prominent component of schnitzel and that the breading is secondary to it, and thus its blessing is “Shehakol”. Regarding salad with croutons, a distinction is made based on the amount of croutons used. If the salad is blanketed by a layer of croutons, it would be appropriate to recite “Mezonot” (or “HaMotzi”, depending on the crouton) and this would exempt the entire salad. If the croutons are sparse, however, one would only need to recite “HaAdama”. If one is in doubt when there is a significant amount of croutons, one could be stringent and recite separate blessings on the croutons and on the vegetables, although this is not necessary strictly speaking. Similarly, if one eats yogurt with a small amount of granola the blessing would remain “Shehakol”, but if the granola is significant, “Mezonot” would be recited. Interestingly, the son of Rabbi Itzhak ben Oualid, Rabbi Yosef ben Oualid (Samo Yosef,  § 273) writes about the Moroccan candy called “Pastille” made of eggs, sugar and some flour. Although the flour is in the minority, it still enhances the taste of the candy and the blessing is therefore “Mezonot” Summary:   The blessing over schnitzel is “Shehakol”. The blessing over salad with croutons is “HaAdama” if the croutons are sparse, and “Mezonot” if there is a thick layer of croutons. The blessing over Moroccan Pastille candies is “Mezonot”.