Reply To: What would you say? – Hilchos Brochos

LU: #1334936 – You are correct. A brocho rishonah is kayam until something is mafsik the achila – either a hesech hada’as, a shinui mokom, or other form of siluk. I was convinced that you (Post 1334343) were suggesting otherwise – and if you weren’t, I don’t understand your “support”.

These are the current sfeikos:

1. I am aware that it is a machlokes haPoskim if Al Hamichya can patter the rice. There are two different scenarios where this shailah arises: (a) you eat rice, and make al hamichya, and (b) you eat cake and rice, and you make al hamichya on the cake; would that work on the rice as well. In both these cases, the question is whether even the poskim who hold that it would work would agree that if you specifically stipulate that the brocho should not be on the rice, do you need a borei nefashos.

2. Does a bracha achrona have anything to do with a bracha rishona, or are they totally independent chiyuvim . I posit that they are totally independent, although I have no definitive proof.

3. Is making a brocho achrona inherently a siluk from the brocho rihsona? Again, I would say not. If I make a mezonos and shehakol (on cake and shnitzel respectively) and make al hamichya on the cake, I think it’s obvious that I can continue eating the shnitzel. The fact that al hamichya is made on a food item which happens to have the same brocho rishona is, in my mind, irrelevant.

4. You keep mentioning “unless you do something considered a hefsek”. Simply deciding to stop eating constitutes a hefsek. When you finish eating and bentch, and you don’t have in mind to continue eating, I think that would be a hefsek.

5. The difference between whether you have started eating or not: In a case where you need greira, I can hear to differentiate. In a case where you don’t (and let’s assume that our case doesn’t), why should it make a difference? You made a brocho, and you have no form of siluk. Why must you have started to eat??