Primary and Secondary Items in Blessings on Pleasure - Rabbi Shaul Silam shlita

00:02 Speaker 1 You’re listening to “Lema’an Yishme’u,” a podcast of Machon Halacha Chabad.

00:09 Speaker 2 Hello. With Hashem’s help, we’ll begin a series of five classes on the subject of primary and secondary foods in the blessings over food. The classes are based mainly on the Alter Rebbe’s Seder Birchos Hanehenin, chapters 3 and 7, with a little from chapter 8, as well as Shulchan Aruch, section 212, and the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch, section 212. Our first topic is a mixture with no mezonos ingredient at all, where one of the two foods is there to enhance the other and is entirely secondary to it. For example, if I have a date with sugar—a date I roll in sugar—the date is clearly the primary food, and the sugar is secondary; it adds flavor to the date. Or potatoes with mayonnaise, right? All cases like these. The Alter Rebbe says that the rule here is that the blessing on the primary food covers the secondary one. What’s very interesting, as we’ll see, is that this applies even if there is more of the secondary food. But first, that isn’t actually stated explicitly by the Alter Rebbe. The Alter Rebbe says that the blessing on the primary food covers the secondary food that comes to add flavor to it, both for the blessing before eating and for the blessing afterward. And as we said, the Pri Megadim, the Mishnah Berurah, the Ketzos Hashulchan, and many later halachic authorities say this is true even if there is more of the secondary food by quantity. That isn’t very common, but you could always have a little potato with mayonnaise left on your plate, and in what remains there’s a bit more mayonnaise. So what blessing do you make? Since all the mayonnaise you’re eating is there to flavor the potato, you make Borei Pri Ha’adamah even if there’s more mayonnaise. It doesn’t sound particularly appetizing, but that’s the point for our purposes. And for the blessing afterward, if there really is a kezayis, you make a blessing afterward. In any case, here the blessing afterward for both foods is Borei Nefashos. So in this case we don’t really have

02:13 Speaker 2 a problem. But the question about the blessing afterward really arises when I have a primary food and a secondary food, and the primary food alone isn’t enough—it isn’t a kezayis that would require me to make a blessing afterward—but the amount of the secondary food brings it up to that measure. Why is that a problem? Let’s recall a few rules we learned from the Alter Rebbe in chapter 8 about the blessing afterward when I haven’t eaten the required measure of any one food, but I’ve eaten several foods. For example, I ate half a kezayis of apple and half a kezayis of date. After the apple I would need to say Borei Nefashos, and after the date I would need to say Al Ha’eitz Ve’al Pri Ha’eitz. Now I have a kezayis in total. Which blessing do I say? The more specific blessing, Al Ha’eitz Ve’al Pri Ha’eitz, or Borei Nefashos? Or say I ate half a kezayis of bread and half a kezayis of mezonos. Do I say Birkas Hamazon or a blessing of the me’ein shalosh type? Those are the questions. In chapter 8 of Seder Birchos Hanehenin, we learn something very interesting from the Alter Rebbe about these cases. We’re talking about the blessing afterward—the question doesn’t arise with the blessing before eating, because whatever the quantity, we always make a blessing over any enjoyment of food. But for the blessing afterward, which does require a minimum measure—and again, we’re not talking about mixtures here, but about eating several foods without eating enough of any one of them—how do I combine the amounts if the blessing afterward differs from one food to another? The Alter Rebbe’s rule is that I follow the less specific of the blessings. He gives several examples. If I eat half a kezayis of one of the seven species and half a kezayis of something whose blessing afterward is Borei Nefashos Rabos, the Alter Rebbe says

04:30 Speaker 2 that we say Borei Nefashos Rabos. Half a kezayis of mezonos and half a kezayis of bread: in that case, I would say Al Hamichyah. The Alter Rebbe also says there that all drinks can be combined. Say I drink half a revi’is of wine and half a revi’is of water—drinks are measured by a revi’is. Here too, we follow the less specific blessing: Borei Nefashos. But he points out that food and drink cannot be combined. In other words, if I drink half a revi’is of a beverage and eat half a kezayis, those amounts cannot be combined. Those are the Alter Rebbe’s rules in chapter 8. Again, that chapter isn’t talking about mixtures. But now let’s return to my case: I ate olives with a little mayonnaise, a kezayis in total. I had several olives, but less than a kezayis of olives. The olives are more of a hypothetical example, because usually we don’t know quite so precisely how much we’ve eaten; we’d try to eat more olives and avoid any doubt. But here’s the hypothetical question: I have less than a kezayis of olives, but together with the mayonnaise that accompanies them, I do have a kezayis. So what blessing do I say? For the blessing before eating, we said there’s a primary food and a secondary food. The olives are primary here, so I say Borei Pri Ha’eitz. But what do I do about the blessing afterward? It’s true that according to the rule we learned in chapter 8, when I have less than a kezayis of each of two foods, I follow the less specific blessing. Here that would be Borei Nefashos. But do I say Borei Nefashos Rabos even though the mayonnaise is so completely secondary that I didn’t make a blessing over it before eating?

06:39 Speaker 2 That’s the question. The answer isn’t stated explicitly by the halachic authorities, but I asked my friend, the distinguished Rabbi Michael Avishid, and he told me that in his opinion, we follow the less specific blessing in this case too. In other words, the rule we learned in chapter 8 of Seder Birchos Hanehenin—that when we eat two foods, we follow the less specific blessing—applies even if one of the foods is secondary. So in this case we say Borei Nefashos. That’s the point. Incidentally, this rule of following the less specific blessing is the Alter Rebbe’s position, but it isn’t accepted by all halachic authorities. For example, the Taz holds that if I eat half a kezayis of apples and half a kezayis of dates, I specifically say Al Ha’eitz Ve’al Pri Ha’eitz. Just as when we eat a kezayis of apples and a kezayis of dates, Al Ha’eitz Ve’al Pri Ha’eitz covers everything, the Taz holds that it does so even when we eat half a kezayis of each. That differs from the Alter Rebbe, who, as we mentioned, says we follow the less specific blessing—in this case, Borei Nefashos. Now, mixtures in which one ingredient is a food whose blessing is Borei Minei Mezonos: In the previous classes, we saw that, as a general rule, we follow the majority. The food that makes up most of the mixture by volume determines the blessing. But as soon as one of the foods in the mixture is a food whose blessing is Borei Minei Mezonos, the rules are entirely different. We always say Borei Minei Mezonos over that mixture, if it really is a mixture, and that blessing covers everything. The exception, says the Alter Rebbe, is when the mezonos ingredient is there only to color the mixture, bind it together, or thicken it, which is

08:50 Speaker 2 He says it is there to make it thicker, and that one has no intention at all of eating the grain. These points are very, very important for what follows. So, to sum up: when I have a mixture—and it has to be a mixture; we defined in the previous classes what counts as one—say I have couscous with a little meat and some vegetables. Even if the couscous is actually the minority, once I have a mixture containing an ingredient whose bracha is Borei Minei Mezonos, the mezonos takes precedence. Mezonos is called food; it is significant in its own right, significant enough to take precedence over everything else. Now, what actually counts as mezonos? Again, not every grain does. There is a common mistake here, because what is called a grain in biology is not necessarily what Chazal call a grain. Chazal speak of five kinds of grain. We encounter them in all sorts of contexts: chametz on Pesach, the laws of challah, what can be used to make matzah, eating outside the sukkah, and many other areas. The five kinds are wheat, barley, spelt, oats, and rye. Those are the grains. It is true that there are thousands of kinds of grain in the world, but those other grains do not have that significance, so their bracha is not Borei Minei Mezonos. If I take rice, millet, quinoa, or something similar and make flour from it, its bracha will never be Borei Minei Mezonos. Now let’s return to the point. We said that for a mixture I will always say Borei Minei Mezonos, except when the mezonos ingredient was added solely to color the mixture, bind it, or thicken it. Sometimes it is also added

10:47 Speaker 2 so that—well, with schnitzel, for example, I add egg and crumbs because I want them to stick. We will discuss schnitzel later. But if I also want the wheat, the mezonos ingredient, the ruling will be different. Right now I am speaking about a case where I only want to color, thicken, or bind the mixture. In that case, the rule I gave does not apply. But if I also want to eat it, the mezonos does take precedence. What about a mixture with rice? Here I need to mention a point that is not about mixtures. The Gemara in Berachos tells us that although rice is not one of the five kinds of grain, because it is filling and sustaining, the Sages ruled that we say Borei Minei Mezonos over rice, followed by Borei Nefashos Rabbos. But some poskim, the Aruch and the Maharil, hold that what we call millet is what they called rice, and what we call rice is what they called millet. They raise the possibility that we are uncertain what “rice” refers to. Is what the Sages called rice what we call rice? Or did they call what we call millet rice, so that the names have effectively been reversed? Because of this uncertainty, the Alter Rebbe takes the doubt into account and does not rule like the majority of poskim. Most poskim hold that we say Borei Minei Mezonos over rice. Because of this doubt, the Alter Rebbe rules that over both rice and millet we say Shehakol Nihyeh Bidvaro. So for us,

12:52 Speaker 2 if I have rice with peas, for example, as we said in the previous classes, I go by the majority: more rice, Shehakol; more peas, Borei Pri Ha’adamah. But what about the majority of poskim, who do not rule like the Alter Rebbe and hold that the bracha over rice is Borei Minei Mezonos? The Shulchan Aruch, for instance, rules that we say Borei Minei Mezonos over rice. Would they say that when I have a minority of rice and more peas, I should say Borei Minei Mezonos over the mixture, since the rice is mezonos? You understand the question. I have not given the answer yet, but I assume you understood. If not, go back and listen to the question again—and to the answer. All the poskim who hold that the bracha over rice is Borei Minei Mezonos nevertheless agree that, since rice is not one of the five kinds of grain that are the primary mezonos foods, the rule that mezonos takes precedence does not apply. So they agree that if I have a mixture with a minority of rice and a majority of peas, I say Borei Pri Ha’adamah, not Borei Minei Mezonos. Now, the ruling for schnitzel. There are many opinions about schnitzel. Usually I present the opinions; here I will also give you my opinion and try to convince you. What did the Alter Rebbe say? He said that when I have a mixture of mezonos and other foods, even if the mezonos has less volume, its significance determines the bracha. If it is a mixture, I say Borei Minei Mezonos over it. There are three exceptions: when the mezonos ingredient is there only to color, bind, or thicken it. The Alter Rebbe adds—and here I am reading from Seder Birchos Hanehenin, chapter 4—chapter

14:48 Speaker 2 3, halacha 4: “When does this apply? When one has no intention at all of eating the grain.” When do I say that mezonos does not take precedence if it is used to bind, thicken, or color something? When I do not intend to eat the grain, but only to bind or thicken the food—that is, to make it thicker—or to give it color. “But if one also intends to eat it, even though it is not the main component and one’s primary intention is to eat the other ingredients, the flour is nevertheless considered primary, and one says Borei Minei Mezonos over it.” So it follows that when I make schnitzel, it is true that I put the crumbs on it to give it a coating. But I also want to eat them. That is not their only purpose. Coating it may even be the main reason, but since I also enjoy eating the coating and want to eat what is around the meat, it is mezonos in every respect. So over schnitzel, with meat and a mezonos coating, one says Borei Minei Mezonos, not Shehakol Nihyeh Bidvaro. It is true that some poskim hold otherwise, but we will examine what each one says. First, in Rabbi Chaim Prus’s book on Seder Birchos Hanehenin, he cites Rabbi Mordechai Ashkenazi as indeed holding this way, primarily, he writes, with regard to commercially produced schnitzels. Meat costs much more than the crumbs, so manufacturers make the coating thick, and people also like it. In that case, one certainly says Borei Minei Mezonos. But Rabbi Ashkenazi, z"l, adds that with homemade schnitzel, where the coating is thin and delicate, one should say only Shehakol Nihyeh Bidvaro over the meat, thereby covering the coating as well. Now, even here, in my humble opinion, based on

16:45 Speaker 2 my understanding of the Alter Rebbe, we need to distinguish between cases. If I really put on just a tiny amount of flour around the meat, with a little egg, solely to make it stick, and there is so little that I can barely taste it and am not seeking that flavor, then yes, I say only Shehakol Nihyeh Bidvaro. But people also make schnitzel at home with purchased breadcrumbs, or a lot of flour, or various kinds of crumbs, because they want that flavor too. It is not just to make the coating thicker. They like it. So it makes no difference whether it is a very thick, commercially produced schnitzel with hardly any meat inside and almost all mezonos, or whether only, say, ten percent is mezonos. If it does add flavor and I want that flavor, then in all these cases, even with homemade schnitzel, I say Borei Minei Mezonos. That is explicit in the Alter Rebbe, according to the rules we have learned. As I said, we will look at what various poskim say and try to analyze their views. Rabbi Wosner discusses this in Shevet Halevi, volume 4, actually in the Even Ha’ezer section. Toward the end of a responsum on Even Ha’ezer, he gets to this question because the person who wrote to him also asked about schnitzel. It is in siman 185. He says that one should say Shehakol Nihyeh Bidvaro over schnitzel, even with all those crumbs around it, because it is like a coated food: one says the bracha over the main food, not the coating. That is his argument, and he wants to prove it from a halacha in Shulchan Aruch, siman 202, concerning a fully developed nut that is fried

18:31 Speaker 2 In honey, and it is called noindo, and one recites Borei Pri Ha’etz over it. That is what it says in Rabbi Yosef Karo’s Shulchan Aruch, section 202, paragraph 13. So he says it is the same thing: just as we recite Borei Pri Ha’etz, and not Shehakol, over that nut coated in honey, here too you recite Shehakol over schnitzel, and not Borei Minei Mezonos. But of course, I am dust beneath Rabbi Wosner’s feet—don’t misunderstand me. Still, his words would seem to be quite incorrect according to the Alter Rebbe, because in that very ruling cited by the Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe gives a different reason. The Alter Rebbe writes: “A nut fried in honey: the honey is not considered the primary component but secondary, since it serves only to make the fruit fit to eat.” In other words, according to the Alter Rebbe, the reason I specifically recite Borei Pri Ha’etz is that the coating serves to make the fruit fit to eat; without it, I really could not eat the fruit. Right. But if the coating is something I want in its own right, that would be different. And more than that, how can I compare our case, which involves Mezonos and Shehakol, to something from a tree coated in something whose blessing is Shehakol? When it comes to Mezonos, we said that we take even a small amount into account, right? So perhaps Rabbi Wosner is indeed correct, but not according to the Alter Rebbe. He can certainly disagree—there are many halachic authorities—but according to the Alter Rebbe, who gave us very clear rules, when I have a mixture, and something coated is considered a mixture in halachah, when I have a mixture of Mezonos with other things, the Alter Rebbe says unequivocally that I recite Mezonos, except in three cases. And even in those three cases, that is only if I want it solely

20:26 Speaker 2 for that purpose—if I only want it to thicken the food and am not interested in its taste. But he says that if I want to eat it, then the blessing is Mezonos. So it is clear according to the Alter Rebbe that the blessing over schnitzel would be Borei Minei Mezonos. Let me continue with the halachic authorities. Let’s see what Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef says in Yalkut Yosef. I looked in the first edition of Yalkut Yosef, volume three, on the blessings. It is very interesting, because Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef does hold that one recites Shehakol over schnitzel, but from his words we will see that he thinks one should recite Borei Minei Mezonos over it. Yes, what I just said sounds surprising. I can repeat it: he does write that one recites Shehakol, but I will show you that he thinks one should recite Borei Minei Mezonos. You could ask him, too. How do I reach that conclusion? Look at what he writes in Yalkut Yosef. First of all, it does not matter that much to us, because what we want to establish here is the Alter Rebbe’s position, but it is interesting nonetheless. Listen, I’ll read it. Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef shlita writes: “Likewise, one recites Shehakol over schnitzel, even though a little flour was put on it to bind it with the egg before frying. There is no difference in this regard between schnitzel made at home and schnitzel made in banquet halls and hotels.” Now, at the end of the note he writes: “Some therefore wanted to distinguish between schnitzel made at home and schnitzel made in banquet halls and hotels. In those places, because they want to save on meat, they use a lot of flour, and their aim is to add flavor and make the schnitzel fit to eat through the flour. But in schnitzel made in one’s own home, the flour is only there to bind it so it can be fried.” Right? What is he saying? Exactly what the Alter Rebbe says. Some want to say this, and we want to say it about homemade schnitzel too, but at least with commercially made schnitzel, he says

22:14 Speaker 2 there does seem to be a reason to say that its blessing would be Borei Minei Mezonos, because I do want the flour around it. And how does he conclude? “However, this is not the view of my master, my father and teacher, shlita.” Rabbi Ovadia was still alive, and he asked him. He says that he asked him and was told that the blessing is Shehakol, and that is why he rules that it is Shehakol. So we see quite explicitly that his own view was that it is Mezonos; it was only because his father, of blessed memory, held that it is Shehakol that he ruled that way. But what is very interesting is that if you look at the book by his brother, Rabbi David Yosef—Halachah Berurah, volume 10, section 208, page 774—Rabbi David Yosef says exactly what I am saying. Yes, exactly like the Alter Rebbe, and so he does not rule like Rabbi Yitzchak Yosef or like his father, zt”l. He writes: “Meat, poultry or fish coated on all sides with flour, matzah meal or breadcrumbs together with eggs, and then fried: if there was very little flour, so that it is apparent that it was added solely to prevent the food from sticking to the pan”—those are exactly the Alter Rebbe’s words. If you put on those crumbs solely to prevent it from sticking to the pan, you recite Shehakol. Excellent; the Alter Rebbe says that too. “But if there was a substantial amount of flour, so that it is apparent that it was added also to give it flavor”—precisely in line with the Alter Rebbe’s position—“also to give it flavor.” Right? Not that it is the primary component, but you do also want its flavor, and it is not there only to prevent sticking, and so on. He says you recite Mezonos over it. So that is indeed Rabbi David Yosef’s view, as we said regarding the Alter Rebbe. So too Rabbi Moshe Levi in his book Birkat Hashem, volume

24:05 Speaker 2 three, and in the responsa Or LeTzion by Rabbi Abba Shaul, volume two, chapter 14. You can look it up; I won’t read all of it. This is also Rabbi Auerbach’s view. Where is it brought? There is a series of books called Darkei Halachah by Rabbi Chaim Schmerler. He was one of the prominent Sanz chassidim, and he presents Rabbi Auerbach’s position just as we have been saying. So one can say that this is quite explicit, although there are Chabad halachic authorities who do not agree with what I am saying. Still, I say that, on examination, this appears to be the Alter Rebbe’s view. This is how Rabbi Ashkenazi, of blessed memory, used to rule, and it is also the view of Rabbi Abba Shaul, Rabbi Auerbach and Rabbi David Yosef. Therefore, that is how we will rule in practice. Perhaps we should add another point about the blessing afterward. When I eat something whose blessing is Mezonos, I recite Al Hamichyah Ve’al Hakalkalah only if I have eaten a kezayis of it within the time it takes to eat a pras—that is, about four minutes, not longer. There are different opinions about how long that is, but four minutes is an average we generally use. So what happens if I eat schnitzel but have not eaten enough of the Mezonos component—a kezayis within the time it takes to eat a pras—or if I am genuinely unsure? But even if I know that I ate a kezayis, just not within that time, it is already a matter of dispute. There are authorities who hold otherwise; this is how we rule. But originally, it is indeed a dispute whether one recites Al Hamichyah or not. So in this case, where I eat a kezayis of the Mezonos component, but over more than the time it takes to eat a pras, and here, with schnitzel, there is also a component whose blessing on its own is Shehakol, then according to the Alter Rebbe in Seder Birchos Hanehenin, chapter 3, halachah 2, what we will do is also try to eat

26:06 Speaker 2 Also a kezayis of some mezonos food within the time it takes to eat a pras, and a kezayis of food requiring Shehakol. Then afterward we’ll say both after-blessings: Al Hamichyah Ve’al Hakalkalah and Borei Nefashos Rabos. Now, dough with a filling—meat, cheese, all kinds of things. Here I’ll read from the Alter Rebbe’s Seder Birchos Hanehenin. It’s the simplest and clearest way to put it. This is chapter 3, halachah 7. The Alter Rebbe says: “Dough filled with meat, fish, cheese, fruit, or the like”—not all together. Right, not meat and fish together; that’s already a problem in itself. And cheese too. The “and” here means “or.” “Dough filled with meat, fish, cheese, fruit, or the like: the filling becomes secondary to the dough and is covered by the blessing on the dough.” So far that’s clear, right? As we said, the dough takes precedence, whether its blessing is Hamotzi or Borei Minei Mezonos. Very clear. “As explained above in chapter 2,” the Alter Rebbe continues, “even if he subsequently eats the filling on its own, and even if there is a great deal of filling and his main reason for eating this dough is the filling.” That tells us a lot. I have this food. I’ve already finished eating the dough, and only meat is left. I continue eating the meat on the strength of the Mezonos blessing I said, because it was part of the combination, right? Even if the filling was what I specifically wanted. But the dough takes precedence, as we said, except in three cases—and this isn’t one of them, because I want the dough too. “Since he also intends to eat the dough,” the Alter Rebbe adds something a little ironic, “there is no need to be stringent.” And here “stringent” belongs in quotation marks, even though the Alter Rebbe doesn’t put it in quotation marks, because it isn’t a stringency. You’ll see from what follows. “There is no need to be stringent by licking a little of the filling off the dough

28:15 Speaker 2 and saying a blessing over it, because that would be a blessing in vain.” If it’s a blessing in vain, it really isn’t a stringency. Right? It really isn’t. In other words, someone might say, “There are mushrooms inside this boureka, so I’ll say Mezonos and also...” No. The Alter Rebbe says you don’t say a blessing over the mushrooms. You want to be righteous, but you’ll end up doing the wrong thing. You want to be stringent, but it’s a blessing in vain, because you already said a blessing over the primary food. When you said Mezonos over the boureka, it covered the mushrooms. You don’t need to say another blessing over the secondary food. The Alter Rebbe adds: “But if he eats only the filling, without the bread, he says the appropriate blessing over it: Shehakol, Borei Pri Ha’adamah, or Borei Pri Ha’eitz.” In other words, if I have a boureka and open it up—I’m on a diet, I’m not eating carbohydrates, and I specifically want the meat inside—then clearly I’ll say Shehakol over it. That’s straightforward. So what’s the example? We spoke about bourekas. The same applies if I have a meat-filled cigar pastry. That’s an even more striking case, because the dough around a cigar pastry is much thinner, right? Like a brik or similar things. So I’ll say Mezonos, and even if some filling remains afterward and I eat it on its own, as we said, I won’t say another blessing. There’s a note about this in Halachah Berurah by Rabbi David Yosef, in siman 212, page 561, for anyone who wants to look it up. He adds something very important. He says that suppose a person ate a meat-filled boureka

30:07 Speaker 2 and also has meat in a bowl on the table—the same meat, right? Now, he said Borei Minei Mezonos over the boureka, opened it, started with the dough, let’s say, and in the end he’s eating just the meat. Even if he’s now eating a lot of meat, that meat was inside the boureka and was therefore secondary. As we said, he won’t say Shehakol over it. That’s what the Alter Rebbe said. But Rabbi David Yosef adds—and it’s quite straightforward—that if I then want to eat more meat and take it from the bowl, the meat in the bowl is certainly not secondary to the boureka, even though it’s the same meat. I didn’t say a separate blessing over the meat that was inside the boureka and that I ate on its own, because the blessing over the boureka covered it. But if I now eat additional meat, then I’ll certainly say Shehakol Nihyah Bidvaro over that additional meat, and Borei Nefashos as the after-blessing.