By Al-Akha Vico Mizrahi, of blessed memory, in the Haim ben Mazal edition, dedicated by his sons and by him during his lifetime for the daily study of halakhah. This is number seven in the Bikim series, in memory of Dania Koala of blessed memory. We are at day sixty-four, dedicated for the elevation of the souls of Daniel A. Quinn ben Bono Frida bat Malka. Today we are on lesson 138.
Let us review what we said in yesterday’s lesson. We discussed placing fruit on the table on Shabbat and preferring to wait until after Birkat Hamazon to serve dessert. The reason is that by making the blessing on the fruit before Birkat Hamazon, one receives only the initial blessing, because Birkat Hamazon will cover the final blessing. During the week, that is actually preferable. On Shabbat, however, we are trying to reach the number one hundred, and every blessing counts. Therefore, the halakhah says that waiting to serve the fruit after Birkat Hamazon is not considered creating an unnecessary blessing. It is better not to place the dessert on the table until after Birkat Hamazon.
We then discussed a significant novelty. Maran maintains that once the table is removed and dessert is brought out, the food being brought is no longer connected to the meal—not for the initial blessing and not for the final blessing. In earlier times, people would remove the table and then bring out a buffet of fruit. In that case, one certainly had to make the initial blessing. The novelty is that even though the fruit is eaten within the context of the meal, one must also make the final blessing, because it is no longer connected to the meal.
We then discussed what happens when the table itself is not moved. Suppose the silverware and plates are changed and the table is completely rearranged. We followed the position of the Ben Ish Hai that it is always preferable to leave bread on the table and eat a small amount of bread before Birkat Hamazon, thereby demonstrating that one remains connected to the meal. Anything short of actually moving the table leaves one connected to the meal, but it is preferable to leave bread on the table and to eat a little bread before the meal ends.
The question was then whether removing the tablecloth is equivalent to removing the table. This is a significant issue. Hacham Ovadia held that removing the tablecloth is like removing the table. It was common for a meal to end with the tablecloth dirty, after which it would be removed and a new tablecloth placed on the table for dessert. According to this position, one would need to make not only a new initial blessing but also a new final blessing.
We discussed wedding meals as well. At a wedding, the table may be moved to make room for dancing. We wanted to argue that this should not be considered the end of the meal, because the table is not being moved because the meal has ended; it is being moved to create space. Some people suggested avoiding the entire uncertainty by placing bread on the second table after the first table is removed. In that way, the people would demonstrate that they had not ended the meal.
We stated, however, that merely placing bread on the second table does not help if no one intends to eat that bread. Perhaps this is what the Ben Ish Hai meant: if a second table is brought, bread should be placed on it and actually eaten, so that the second table remains connected to the first. The Hesed LaAlafim did not accept the idea that simply keeping bread on the table solves the problem.
Now consider a disposable plastic tablecloth. Once that tablecloth is removed, is it considered as though the table itself has been removed? Even with a disposable tablecloth, the act of pulling it off the table may signify that the meal has ended. Nevertheless, it is recommended to recite Birkat Hamazon before removing the tablecloth. That way, one avoids all of these problems. Afterward, one may eat fruit or any other dessert, with the appropriate blessings before and after.
In section sixty-two, Halakhah Berurah discusses this question. Although we have treated removing a tablecloth as equivalent to removing the table, that applies when the tablecloth is the only covering and its removal leaves the table bare. Nowadays, however, it is common to spread a cloth tablecloth over the table and then cover it with a clear plastic sheet. The plastic protects the cloth tablecloth from spills and stains. If the plastic is removed after the meal, while the regular tablecloth remains on the table, it is not necessarily considered that the table has been removed. The table is still there, and the regular tablecloth is still there.
Hacham David wants to say that removing the plastic covering does not signify the end of the meal as long as the real tablecloth remains. If the table had been covered only with a disposable plastic tablecloth, however, then the situation is different. In that case, removing it may be equivalent to removing the table.
Hacham Bitan raises an objection to this ruling. It is difficult to agree that the matter depends on whether another tablecloth remains underneath. The Talmudic rule itself has nothing to do with tablecloths; it deals with removing the table. The earlier authorities cited in the previous discussion stated that removing the tablecloth can symbolize the end of the meal, just as removing the table does. If so, removing a disposable tablecloth should also symbolize the end of the meal, even when a cloth tablecloth remains underneath. It may therefore make more sense to apply the ruling in that case as well.
I understand what Rabbi Bitan is saying. In the end, the tablecloth was removed, and that act signifies that the meal is ending. In fact, the meal is ending: dessert is now being brought out. The novelty is that removing the tablecloth is like removing the table. What difference does it make that another tablecloth remains underneath? In practical terms, the table on which the main meal was eaten has been cleared, and now there is a different setup for dessert. The tablecloth may symbolize that change.
It may be that Halakhah Berurah is discussing people who customarily remove the cloth covering from the table after the meal. For them, removing a disposable plastic covering does not necessarily signify the end of the meal if the cloth covering remains. Some people always leave a tablecloth on the table, even when no one plans to eat. For them, removing the plastic may indeed signify that the meal is over, because the cloth tablecloth is normally left in place. Nevertheless, it is best to avoid entering this uncertainty. If the plastic tablecloth is going to be removed, it is preferable to recite Birkat Hamazon first and then begin dessert. With an ordinary tablecloth, this issue does not arise in the same way.
Let us review the cases. Suppose it is Friday night and there is one beautiful white tablecloth on the table. The meal is over, and before dessert is served someone removes the entire tablecloth, leaving the table bare or replacing the tablecloth with another one. Everyone agrees that this is a removal of the tablecloth equivalent to a removal of the table. If you made a blessing on the cantaloupe before the meal, the blessing recited on the bread will not necessarily cover the cantaloupe, and you may need to make another blessing on it. What if the tablecloth was plastic? In that case, the authorities disagree. The practical advice is to avoid the uncertainty and recite Birkat Hamazon before removing the plastic tablecloth.
Someone asked about coffee and tea. That is a question from a different category. We are not discussing here which foods qualify as dessert; we discussed that for several weeks, including fruit, coffee, whiskey, and other items. We are discussing what happens once we know which items are being served: do we need to make a blessing on them after the table or tablecloth has been removed?
The Ben Ish Hai wanted to say that leaving bread on the second table would help, but the Hesed LaAlafim disagreed. The Ben Ish Hai suggests eating bread from the second table, but he does not clearly conclude the matter. Perhaps this is why he said that a God-fearing person should make sure to eat a little bread before the end of the meal—not necessarily because he explicitly ruled that this keeps the meal connected, but because it avoids the uncertainty. Once the tablecloth has been changed, however, it sounds as though the meal has ended.
Now let us discuss a different case. Suppose the table is moved but the person continues eating foods that are part of the meal, such as meat, fish, or rice. Does he make a new blessing on them? One might say that because the table was removed, the meal has ended and a new blessing is required. On the other hand, these foods are meal foods, and perhaps they remain connected to the original meal.
The Mishnah Berurah cites the Rashba as ruling that even after the table has been removed, no separate blessing is necessary for meat, fish, or porridge, because these foods are part of the main course. Rabbeinu Hananel ruled that separate blessings are necessary. Maran, in the Shulchan Aruch, appears to rule that after the table has been removed, separate blessings are necessary for all foods. Following the principle that we are lenient in cases of uncertainty regarding blessings, Hacham David said that in practice we would not follow Maran’s ruling in this case. If someone insists on making the blessings, however, Maran did rule that they are necessary, and another authority ruled that one must recite separate blessings on all foods in this situation. Hacham David disagreed.
So, practically speaking, suppose the table or tablecloth has been removed, but someone is still eating. He says, “I am not finished. I am still eating.” My advice would be: do not touch the tablecloth yet; give me two more minutes to finish. If someone has one lamb chop left in his hand and the table is moved, we may have to analyze the matter. That very lamb chop was present from the beginning and was part of the meal. It is still the same item, and I do not think its status changes simply because the table was moved. The discussion is more relevant when new food is brought out after the table has been removed—more chicken, more fish, or other items. If the person is still holding the same food that was served as part of the original meal, it is clearly connected to that meal.
The authorities also discuss cooked chickpeas. Halakhah Berurah rules that if someone wishes to eat cooked chickpeas after the table has been removed, he must recite a separate blessing before eating them and a final blessing afterward, because this food is not normally served as part of the meal. We clarified that this refers to a snack-type food, something crunchy, more like chips—not chickpeas cooked with rice as part of the meal. If the table and tablecloth have not been removed, one must recite the initial blessing and the final blessing on such a snack. In that context, it is treated more like dessert.
Now we come to beverages. Or LeTzion states that even after the table has been removed, no separate blessing is necessary for a beverage, because a beverage is always considered part of the meal. People normally expect to continue drinking until they recite Birkat Hamazon. A person may stop eating the main foods, but he does not necessarily stop drinking until the end of the meal.
On the other hand, some authorities say that once a person has ended the meal by removing the bread, he has automatically ended his consumption of all subordinate foods. If he wants to drink something after removing the table, he must recite a separate blessing. That would mean that once the table is moved, one would need to make a new blessing on water. Hacham Ben Zion did not rule that way. Hacham Ben Zion stated that one continues drinking until the end of the meal.
Cakes are another question. The authorities quote Rabbi Akiva Eiger as saying that no separate blessing is necessary for cake eaten after the table has been removed. Cake may be considered part of the meal itself, and there is also an uncertainty regarding its blessing. Since it may be connected to the meal, one should not automatically treat it like fruit. With meat and fish, the advice was to stay away from eating them after the table has been removed because of the uncertainty. With cake, however, the ruling was not stated in the same way. It sounds as though cake may be eaten, although we need to examine Hacham Ben Zion’s reasoning more carefully.
The main point we reached today is that removing a disposable tablecloth is not a simple matter. Some authorities say that once the tablecloth is removed, the table has effectively been removed. Hacham David says that when a regular cloth tablecloth remains underneath the plastic, removing the plastic is not considered a removal of the table. Rabbi Bitan questions that distinction and says that if the tablecloth was removed after the main meal, what difference does it make what was underneath it?
There is another situation that occurs frequently. Suppose we remove the tablecloth, take it outside to the back porch, shake it out, perhaps to feed the birds, and then return the very same tablecloth to the table. It is not a new tablecloth, but it was removed from the table. The table was bare for three minutes, and then the same tablecloth was put back. Now dessert is served. Has the meal already ended merely because the tablecloth was temporarily removed? In earlier times, one might even have removed the entire table, emptied it, and then brought the same table back with dessert. Once it was removed, did that already constitute a termination of the meal, requiring a different table when dessert was served? This is something that can be analyzed, and perhaps Rabbi Bitan will address it.
We should not belittle these questions. They happen all the time. People clear the table, change the forks, knives, spoons, and plates, and rearrange everything. We have said that merely cleaning up without moving the original table is not necessarily enough to end the meal. Even so, I would always leave bread on the table when the table is being cleaned, so that I do not enter into any uncertainty.
According to the Kabbalah, one should leave bread on the table until the end of the meal. Especially when people are cleaning the table and making various changes, leaving bread there helps avoid the question of whether a new final blessing is needed on the fruit. On Shabbat, this issue usually does not apply to me because I recite the blessings on the food after Birkat Hamazon. It may arise during the week at a banquet, a Sheva Berakhot meal, or any other bread meal. Even if the table is not normally cleared, it is safer to leave bread on it.
Imagine going to a fancy restaurant where disposable paper coverings are placed on the tables. The staff removes one paper covering, leaving another clean disposable covering underneath. In such a case, there is still a question. The safest procedure is to recite Birkat Hamazon before the covering is removed and then eat dessert. Otherwise, one may place oneself in a situation where a final blessing is required on the dessert.
Sometimes a restaurant places a clean tablecloth over the dirty one instead of removing the dirty one. That is a different situation, because the original tablecloth has not physically been removed. I would give a restaurant one star for placing a clean tablecloth over a dirty one, but the halakhic question is whether the original tablecloth remains in place. According to the Ben Ish Hai, merely bringing a second table or placing bread on it does not necessarily solve the problem. Nevertheless, whenever the table is being cleaned or rearranged, it is preferable to leave bread on the table.
Perhaps this is the reason the Ben Ish Hai says, according to the Kabbalah, that one should eat a small piece of bread before the end of the meal: perhaps it is intended to keep the meal alive for the dessert. But he does not explicitly say that this is the reason. In any event, placing bread on a second table will not necessarily help once the original table or tablecloth has been removed.
Rabbi Bitan also says that once the tablecloth has been changed, one should stop eating ordinary meal foods, because a new blessing may be required. Fruit is certainly a different matter; one may need to make a new blessing on fruit after the table is changed. The question is whether one may return to the original meal foods. If a person is holding a lamb chop that he began eating during the meal, I do not think its status changes merely because the table was moved. But if the table has been cleared and fish is brought out again, is the person still eating the meal, or has the meal ended? Once the table is changed, that generally indicates that the original meal is over. That is why some authorities say that one should not return to the buffet for more fish or meat after the table has been cleared.
These details show that the great righteous people calculate everything they do. Watch them at a meal and you will learn a great deal: the blessings they make, the order in which they make them, why they say to serve a particular food first, and why they leave bread on the table. All of these actions are intended to prevent uncertainty regarding blessings.
Intuitively, I know that if I pick up a cup of coffee, I need a blessing. I did not have to wake up at three in the morning to learn that. But I would not intuitively know that Birkat Hamazon might not cover fruit that was eaten after the table was removed. How could it be that I recited Birkat Hamazon and still need another final blessing? The answer is that the fruit was eaten after the table had been removed, so that fruit was no longer connected to the meal, and Birkat Hamazon does not cover it.
Cake may be treated more like fish and other foods that belong to the meal, which leaves us with an uncertainty. Therefore, when a new table is brought and cake is served for dessert, which is very common, we do not automatically make a new blessing. The question is whether we are permitted to eat it at all. With meat and fish, the advice was to avoid eating them after the table has been changed. With cake, Hacham Ben Zion did not say to avoid it, so it sounds as though cake may be eaten. We need to examine why cake is treated differently from fish.
Someone joked that we should print all these halakhot and leave them on the table next to every plate, with instructions explaining how to navigate the meal. In a sense, that is exactly what is needed. These matters require practice. As much as we think we know the laws of blessings, there are many details that are not intuitive.
Now let us return to the question about drinks during the meal. Coffee and tea are discussed in an earlier section. Some authorities say that one must make a blessing on these beverages, while others say that the blessing recited at the beginning of the meal covers them. It is therefore preferable to leave the coffee and tea until after Birkat Hamazon. The Ben Ish Hai suggested making a blessing on the sugar, thereby covering the drink. Coffee and tea during the meal are a dispute. It is very common to drink coffee during a meal, and it is also common to serve coffee as dessert. The question is whether the blessing made earlier covers it.
On Shabbat, when one recites the blessing over wine during Kiddush, that blessing covers all beverages. The question during the week is whether Hamotzi covers the drinks. Hamotzi covers foods that are related to the meal, but the status of coffee, tea, and other drinks can be disputed. If one recites the blessing over wine, however, that blessing covers all beverages, regardless of whether they are related to the meal.
There is another example: an alcoholic drink served during the meal. There is a dispute regarding whether it is covered by the meal’s blessing. Is it being served to stimulate the appetite, or is it simply a drink? If the blessing over wine was recited, there is no problem. But if a person recited only Hamotzi and then wants to drink scotch during the meal, the question arises whether a new blessing is required. The safest procedure is to make the blessing over the scotch before washing for bread. Then one avoids the uncertainty.
Someone may ask, “Why are you making a blessing on the scotch if you are about to wash for bread?” The answer is that there is a dispute about whether the blessing is required, so it is being made beforehand to avoid the problem. This is a change in habit. If someone has done something one way for fifty years, it is difficult to change, but with practice it becomes natural.
For example, I was in Florida with the Rebbetzin. We went to a restaurant, and I wanted bread with a hamburger. The server asked whether I wanted sparkling water. I said yes, but I did not wash immediately. I waited until the sparkling water arrived, recited the blessing on it, and only then washed for bread. The Rebbetzin wondered why I was making a blessing at that point, but I was waiting because I wanted to make sure that the blessing on the drink was recited before the meal.
It is a life-changing practice, but one must do it several times before it becomes habitual. I am now changing my own habit and making the blessing on the drink before washing whenever necessary. On Friday night, when I recite the blessing over wine, the situation is different. During the week, however, I make sure to address the drink beforehand.
It is also useful to keep jelly beans or another food whose blessing is always Shehakol in the house. When a question arises during the meal—perhaps a drink was brought without making the blessing beforehand, or coffee is being served—one can eat a jelly bean, recite Shehakol, and have the drink in mind. The Ben Ish Hai suggested reciting the blessing on sugar, tasting the sugar, and then drinking. The principle is the same: there is a practical way to avoid the uncertainty.
That answers the question about drinks. If one recited the blessing over wine during the week, that blessing covers the drinks as well. The issue we have been discussing applies when a person recited Hamotzi but did not recite the blessing over wine. On Shabbat, however, Kiddush resolves the matter.
Someone also asked about the custom of eating matzah or another food immediately after Kiddush and then washing for the meal. In my grandfather’s home, we would come home and my grandmother would bring out matzah, kebbeh, a meat pastry, or something similar. Twenty minutes later, someone would say, “Now it is time for the meal,” and we would wash. Many Syrian families have this custom.
Yesterday we reconsidered the question because the authorities said that the concern about a minimum olive-sized portion applies primarily to fruit and similar foods. Foods that are part of the meal are different. The Jerusalem custom of eating an egg on the night of Passover without reciting a separate final blessing demonstrates that a food connected to the meal does not necessarily require its own final blessing. I have not yet received Rabbi Bitan’s answer, but I assume that with cake and similar foods one might be told to eat less than an olive-sized portion in order to avoid the uncertainty.
When it comes to foods that are clearly part of the meal, however, the discussion stated in note seventeen was that one does not need to worry about whether the person ate an olive-sized portion. One may eat as much as one wants, wash, and continue the meal without reciting a separate final blessing. Regarding one’s custom, I would not change it. According to this discussion, the initial blessing is not unnecessary, especially on Shabbat, when we want the additional blessings. I would also not recite a separate final blessing, because these foods are ultimately part of the meal. Only foods that are not part of the meal create the concern.
There is an idea of having the meal immediately after Kiddush. If one eats mezonot after Kiddush, that may serve as the meal, although I do not know whether one must then recite Hamotzi. Most Syrian families have this custom, and it appears to be an old practice. Perhaps they did it partly because of the importance of additional blessings on Shabbat, and perhaps they also did not want to bring a snack-type food to the main table. They separated the two parts: first the matzah or other food after Kiddush, and then the regular meal.
Someone mentioned lahmacun served on a thin pastry or wrapper rather than on bread. In that case, reciting the blessing of mezonot is the safest approach, depending on the nature of the item. We also discussed raw vegetables. Are raw vegetables considered part of the meal? If they are part of the meal, then one may eat as much as one wants without concern for a separate final blessing. Some authorities, however, say that raw vegetables served before Hamotzi are not necessarily part of the meal, and one may need the final blessing of Borei Nefashot. This remains a significant discussion.
For our practice, vegetables are generally part of the meal, but the authorities do debate raw vegetables in particular. Even if a person ate an olive-sized portion, we would not necessarily tell him to recite the final blessing. Nevertheless, it is better to avoid the uncertainty when possible.
We will stop here. It was a good review and a good study session.