5

Sometimes, if I'm not paying too much attention to what I'm doing, I accidentally say asher yatzar when I'm commencing a berakha over food. Obviously, I should pay more attention to what I'm doing but, bediavad:

  • If somebody does start saying asher yatzar in a berakha that does not require it, should s/he stop and start again from the beginning?
  • Is there a fall-back berakha that can be made (ie: to turn this quickly into a berakha for something else that can easily be done immediately after reciting it)?
  • Would quickly turning this into a berakha for something else be problematic - ie: because the individual making the berakha didn't have that action originally in mind? (Any more problematic, that is, than reciting a berakha over something while one's mind is wandering anyway?)
  • 1
    If you said the 1st 3 words of a ברכה, you can use T'hillim 119:12 (Kol Bo 24 citing R' Yonah). The צל"ח (B'rachos 39a) says you can complete דברי הימים I 29:10 if you said the first 3.75 words, but this is not a whole verse, so you should add בשכמל"ו. If you said the first 4 words, you can use D'varim 1:6, 5:2 or T'hillim 99:8 (cf. פסקי תשובות OC 206, fn. 109). – Fred Jul 20 '16 at 8:30
  • ...Also, Y'sha'ya 26:13 or Divrei HaYamim I 29:16. Possibly, however, the Tz'LaCh and some other acharonim who mention Divrei HaYamim I 29:10 (rather than 29:16 and similar verses) may have some reason to only want to specifically use verses beginning with "בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה", even at the expense of not saying an entire verse. – Fred Jul 20 '16 at 8:37
  • Don't worry, we've all made that mistake. ;) – ezra Jul 20 '16 at 14:17
  • if you get past the first three words you can finish the bracha followed by "baruch sheim..." this way the bracha is praise of Hashem rather than a bracha levatala. – Dude Jul 20 '16 at 15:27
  • @Fred wonder. I thaugh to this pasuk of Vayvarch David many times for this but metarets myself that it is not the starting of the pasuk – kouty Jul 20 '16 at 18:29
3

Mistakes in Brachot are discussed in Masechet Brachot in two places. We will examine one of them, the relevant one for this question.

When someone - 1 - already said the name of G-d, and when - 2 - only one bracha is needed, (not a couple of consecutive Brachot as in Havdala), and - 2 - the said Bracha and the needed Bracha are linked (in their function), e.g. two brachot which are before food eating, the Gemara Brachot 12a {1} can give some answers. You wrote:

I accidentally say asher yatzar when I'm commencing a berakha over food.

Tosfot {2} report diverse opinions on this Sugia, Rif principle of Kula, RI principle of Chumra and RaCh. Following the principle of the Rif, there is a safek Derabanan, leKula. The psak, is issued from the non-conclusion of the Gemara. It is allowed to correct the blessing statement Toch Kede Dibur. And the Shem Hashem and Malchut was said in a approximately right intention, even if destined to an other kind of Bracha.

The Chidush of Rach (Note that this pshat on Rabenu Chanan'el is based on the reading of the Tosfot, not on Rabenu Chanan'el on the daf. It is also different from the pshat of Raavad in sefer Catuv Sham and on Rambam hilchot Brachot chapter 8).

Tosfot described following RaCh a special situation, similar to this described by the OP. Here are the two examples described in Tosfot. First case: A man knows that he holds a glass of wine and inadvertently, he blessed something else; second case: he knows that today is Yom Tov and the prayer is the prayer of Yom Tov, and have inadvertently said "Mekadesh Hashabbat". According to RaCh, these two examples are from the cases of the Gemara, because here there is no mistake concerning what is blessed (wine, Yom Tov) and how to blessing (Knows the right Bracha), only there was a discrepancy between the intentional and the spoked thinking. So, the Shem Hashem (and Malchut) was well oriented (right object, right intentional thinking). According to this chidush of RaCh, if you wanted to say Asher Yatsar and kown why, but your mouth said Hamotsi Leshem. You can rectify toch Kede Dibbur.

Without the Chidush of RaCh, it is less obvious, may be not good and you need to repeat the whole Bracha (to answer this side see Raavad). RI also explained that the problem of the Gemara is that a Kavana for somewhat else is different from lack of Kavana, it is an opponed Kavana for an object excluded from the Bracha is an opponed Kavana to the Bracha, not only a lack of Kavana. (this is an important svara for understanding several problems in this suggia). See SA OC 209 1-2 after the reading of Tosfot. The Shulchan Aruch follows the Rambam on his first words, and in "Yesh Omrim" follows the Pshat described above (Rashi and Baal Hamaor). Magen Avraham stated as the last. Mishna Berura too (209 sk 2)

So:

If somebody does start saying asher yatzar in a berakha that does not require it, should s/he stop and start again from the beginning?

--> No, toch Kede Dibbur he need to correct and properly blessing after Haolam.

Is there a fall-back berakha?

--> after Hashem, "lammedeni Chukkecha" (Tehilim 119), ruled in SA OC (206, 6). E.G if the fruit falled after he finished the word Hashem. But it is not a Bracha, it is a verse recitation.

Would quickly turning this into a berakha for something else be problematic - ie: because the individual making the berakha didn't have that action originally in mind?

--> Yes. It is ruled by the RaCh in Tosfot and stated by the Shulchan Aruch in the sayif 2 of the above cited siman.


Sources:

{1} Gemara 12a.

פשיטא היכא דקא נקיט כסא דחמרא בידיה וקסבר דשכרא הוא ופתח ומברך אדעתא דשכרא וסיים בדחמרא יצא דאי נמי אם אמר שהכל נהיה בדברו יצא דהא תנן על כולם אם אמר שהכל נהיה בדברו יצא אלא היכא דקא נקיט כסא דשכרא בידיה וקסבר דחמרא הוא פתח ובריך אדעתא דחמרא וסיים בדשכרא מאי בתר עיקר ברכה אזלינן או בתר חתימה אזלינן . ‏

There is no question that where a man took up a cup of wine thinking that it was beer and commenced [with the intention to say the benediction] for beer but finished with that of wine, he has fulfilled his obligation. For even had he said the benediction, 'By whose word all things exist', he would have fulfilled his duty, as we have learnt: 'In the case of all of them, if he says, "By whose word all things exist", he has performed his obligation'. But where he took up a cup of beer thinking it was wine and began [with the intention to say the benediction] for wine and finished with the benediction for beer, the question arises, do we judge his benediction according to its beginning or according to its ending? ... Come and hear from the concluding clause: 'The principle is that the final form is decisive'. What further case is included by the words 'the principle is'? Is it not the one we have mentioned? - No; it is to include bread and dates. How are we to understand this? Shall I say that he ate bread thinking that he was eating dates, and commenced [with the intention of saying the benediction] for dates and finished [with the blessing for] bread? This is just the same thing! - No, this is required [for the case where] he ate dates thinking that he was eating bread, and he began with [the intention to say the blessing] for bread and finished with that of dates. In this case he has fulfilled his obligation; for even if he had concluded with the blessing for bread, he would also have fulfilled it. What is the reason? - Because dates also give sustenance.

{2} Bellow the words of our Tosfot: לא לאתויי נהמא. ופירש רב אלפס השתא דלא אפשיטא בעיין אזלינן לקולא ואפילו פתח <בחמרא וסיים בשכרא יצא. ור''י הי' אומר לחומרא דצריך לברך פעם אחרת. ומיהו היה אומר ר''ח אם היה יודע בבירור שטעה בדבורו שאמר בורא פרי העץ תחת (בורא) פרי הגפן דבתוך כדי דבור יכול לחזור בו. וכן בי''ט בחתימה של יום טוב אם טעה בין מקדש ישראל והזמנים ואמר מקדש השבת וחזר בתוך כדי דבור יצא אחרי שהוא יודע שהוא י''ט. והקשה הר''ר יעקב מקינון מאי קא מבעיא ליה והא ודאי מצות אינן צריכות כוונה. והיה אומר הר''י דהיינו בשומע תפלה אחורי בית הכנסת ולא נתכוין לצאת. אבל היכא דנתכוין לברך על היין ונמצא שכר לא מהני: ‏


Note: The Klalim of Safek Berachot Lehakel is true only because the duty of Brachot is Miderabanan. So the example of date and bread in Gemara, which is concerning Bracha Acharona Me'en 3 or BHM, which are Min Hatora for a great enough quantity, is not relevant for the Klal used by Rif for the psak here. (from a logical point of view in Gemara it is not relevant because the Gemara argued this at a searching step, hopping to find the radical rule.)

Nafka Mina for Birkat Hatora and Birkat Hamazon, the rule of the Rif has no utilization and we need to repeat entirely the blessing from the beginning.

1

This answer is for the case of someone who has not well identified the food when starting the Bracha and toward the end rectified his mistake.

The halacha is presented by reading the Text of Baal Hamaor.

Rif Brachot on Dape Harif 6a (strangely our version of Rif is congruent with the Pshat of the Baal Hamaor.):

פשיטא היכא דנקט כסא דחמרא בידיה וקסבר דשכרא הוא פתח וברך בדשכרא וסיים בדחמרא יצא אלא היכא דנקיט כסא דשכרא בידיה וקסבר דחמרא הוא פתח בדחמרא וסיים בדשכרא מאי? בתר פתיחה אזלינן או בתר חתימה אזלינן ולא איפשיטא ולקולא עבדינן ולא מהדרינן ליה דספקא דרבנן לקולא. ‏

Baal Hamaor:

נראה שיש חילוף בין הגרסא שלנו ובין הגרסא שלו וכן נראה שיש שיבוש בגירסא שלו מן הגמרא לפי שמצאנו כתוב בהלכות בענין פשיטא היכא דנקט כסא דחמרא בידיה וכך נמצא כתוב בהן אי נמי היכא דנקיט כסא דשכרא בידיה וקסבר בדחמרא הוא פתח בדחמרא וסיים בדשכרא יצא אלא פתח בדשכרא וסיים בדחמרא מאי ולא איפשיטא ולקולא עבדינן וזה שיבוש הוא

  • 1 - Disqualifying seel => the blessing is ruled invalid;

    דפתח בדשכרא וסיים בדחמרא לא איבעיא לן מעולם דהא פשיטא היא דאי כסא דשכרא הוא דנקיט בידיה לא יצא ואי כסא דחמרא דנקט הוא בידיה הא נמי פשיטא דיצא דאי נמי סיים בדשכרא יצא

וסוגיין דפתח בזו וסיים בזו יצא ובלבד שלא יטעה בחתימה שהיא העיקר דעד כאן לא איבעיא לן אלא בטועה בפתיחה אבל בחתימה ליכא ספקא דודאי לא יצא

והא דאמרינן

  • 2 - Disqualifying opening and valuable seal was the problem. The Gemara tried to answer by the case of someone who ate a piece of bread, at the opening of the Bracha Acharona, he believed this was a date and said Al Haets, but at the seal level he rectify himself and blessed for bread (Hazan Et Hakol).

טעה בפתיחה יצא אפילו אכל נהמא וקסבר דתמרי אבל פתח בדתמרי וסיים בדנהמא יצא דהיינו בעיין

  • 3 - But our problem remained unresolved, because dates are very nutritive (Zan). And when he holds a cup of of beer, was believing this was wine at the opening of the Bracha and rectify himself at the level of the seal and blessed for beer (SheHakol), the question is still open and we are lenient and he doesn't need to bless again.

בפתח בדחמרא וסיים בדשכרא דלא אפשיטא ולקולא עבדינן ולא מהדרינן ליה ואף על גב דמתמה עלה בגמרא מאי קא נפיק לפום בעיין מתמהינן עלה כלומר אי הכי תפשוט בעיין ובמקום הזה לא נתבררו דברי הרי"ף כשפירש דין אכל תמרי ולא פירש דין אכל נהמא ואדרבה ההוא הוה ליה לאשמועינן טפי


  • 4 - What is a bad seal? When it is not including this food (for instance Adama includes Ets), Ets does not include Adama. Birkat Al Haets Veal Peri Haets from Birkat Me'en Shalosh for dates does not include Al Hamazon for bread.

והא דאמרינן לעיל היכא דטעה בחתימה לא יצא הני מילי בחותם בכסא דשכרא בדחמרא אי נמי בחותם בנהמא בדתמרי (I rectified a typo error in my Gemara)


  • 5 - But sealing for beer (Shehakol) includes for wine (Hagafen, as the Mishna stated for everything if he said Shehakol it is valid), sealing Bracha Acharona for bread (Hazan Et Hakol) includes what is needed for dates (Al Haets Veal Haperot) because dates are very nutritive (Zan).

אבל __בחותם בכסא דחמרא בדשכרא אי נמי בחותם בתמרי בדנהמא יצא ואין זו טעות ולא הוצרכתי לכתוב לך עיקר הגירסא כי ידועה וברורה בכל ספרינו ופירוש ההלכה תמצאנו על אופניו בפירוש רש"י ז"ל


Note: The Klalim of Safek Berachot Lehakel is true only because the duty of Brachot is Miderabanan. So the example of date and bread in Gemara, which is concerning Bracha Acharona Me'en 3 or BHM, which are Min Hatora for a great enough quantity, is not relevant for the Klal used by Rif for the psak here. (from a logical point of view in Gemara it is not relevant because the Gemara argued this at a searching step, hopping to find the radical rule.)

Nafka Mina for Birkat Hatora and Birkat Hamazon, the rule of the Rif has no utilization and we need to repeat entirely the blessing from the beginning

  • IMPORTANT clal for brachot with Tora duty – kouty Jul 27 '16 at 3:13

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .