BUMP (since it doesn’t show up that I responded and I want to make sure that Yekke sees my last 3 posts before he goes back to Yeshiva.
Also, I wanted to add something since I realized after I wrote my third to last post that maybe it wasn’t so clear.
My main point was that I don’t understand why you didn’t understand my svara.
There are three situations: 1. He ate mezonos and rice and said al hamichya and started eating rice, and now wants to continue eating rice.
2. He ate only Mezonos and said al hamichya and didn’t start eating rice, and now wants to start eating rice w/o a bracha.
3. He only ate Mezonos and said al hamichya and didn’t start eating rice and wants to start eating rice w/o a bracha five hours later.
The question was: If you are allowed to eat the rice in the first case, would you also be allowed to eat the rice in the second case?
My feeling was that you can’t. My “support” was based on the fact that presumably you are not allowed to in case three, and since case three is the same as case 2, then you must not be allowed to in case 2.
There are two possible answers to this svara: A. You are in fact allowed to eat the rice in Case 3.
or B. There is a difference between case 2 and case 3 which allows you to eat the rice in Case 2 and not in Case 3.
I am not sure why you don’t understand my svara. It sounds like you may have a reason why the two cases are different, but since I didn’t know about the difference, that doesn’t mean it’s not a good svara.
Are you saying that there is a difference between the two cases? If so, what is it?
Is it that in the Second Case, you are assuming that when he said the Al Hamichya, he specifically had in mind to eat rice, and in the Third Case you are assuming he didn’t? If so, I didn’t actually say in the third case that he didn’t have this in mind. What if he did have it in mind? Would you then say that he is allowed to eat the rice 5 hours later?