Today we’re learning Aruch Hashulchan. We’re in the complicated laws of berachot (blessings), in siman (section) resh-daled, Dinei Birchat Shehakol (Laws of the Shehakol blessing). What does he want to teach us about Birchat Shehakol? You see four. “Send a phone.” Let’s go around the table. Halachah alef (the first law): “Al devarim she’ein gidulan min ha’aretz, kegon besar behemah” (on things that do not grow from the ground, such as the meat of an animal). That means meat. “Chayah va’of” (wild animals and birds)—chicken; “dagim” (fish); “beitzim” (eggs); “chalav” (milk); “gevinah” (cheese). On these, one recites Shehakol nihyah vidvaro, which is a general berachah (blessing) for all things. Even though all living creatures are nourished from the ground, you might think that one should recite Borei peri ha’adamah (Who creates the fruit of the ground) over a piece of meat, since animals get their nourishment from the ground. He says, “ein gidulan min ha’aretz” (they do not grow from the ground). There is a difference between getting nourishment from the ground and growing from the ground. Since they do not grow from the ground, they are not adamah. “Veyeish lehavin, lamah shinu halashon bevirchat Shehakol, vehavei dei lomar Borei kol bidvaro” (we must understand why the wording of the Shehakol blessing was changed; it would have been enough to say, “Who creates everything by His word”). We say Borei minei mezonot (Who creates various kinds of nourishment), Borei peri ha’adamah, and Borei peri ha’etz (Who creates the fruit of the tree). So why not say Borei kol bidvaro? Why did we change it to Shehakol nihyah vidvaro? He asks, “U’chemo she’omerim Borei minei mezonot, Borei peri ha’etz, peri ha’adamah, kemo chen hayah lanu lomar gam ken halashon Borei kol bidvaro” (just as we say these blessings, we could likewise have said, “Who creates everything by His word”). “Venir’eh delashon beri’ah eino nofel rak al davar shemitchadesh bechol shanah veshanah” (it appears that the word “creation” applies only to something that is renewed year after year), such as produce or fruit. They regenerate each year. The word beri’ah refers to renewal, as in Bereishit bara Elohim (In the beginning, God created). An animal, however, is constant; it does not regenerate every year. It is the same animal. It might get bigger, but it is the same animal. A fruit tree regenerates, so that is a beri’ah. That’s a nice chiddush (novel insight). “Eino nofel aleha lashon beri’ah, lashon havayah” (the language of creation does not apply to it; rather, the language of existence). It exists. “Shehakol nihyah”—it exists. “Kelomar, hu amar vayehi, vezeh she’omerim Shehakol nihyah vidvaro” (that is, He spoke and it came to be, and that is why we say, “Everything came to be through His word”). The yud is pronounced with a segol. Ashkenazim say Shehakol nihyeh, which is the present-tense form, not with a kamatz. We say Shehakol nihyah vidvaro, which is the past-tense form. “Dechol haberachot anu tofesim lashon beinoni, hakol al he’avar veha’atid, deyeish hashgachato yitbarach hi temidit beli hefsek” (all the blessings use a form that encompasses the past and the future, because His providence is constant, without interruption). Ashkenazim say nihyeh because it is constant; we say nihyah.
“Vechen, bet, pat she’ifshah” (and likewise, second: bread that has spoiled). The bread became moldy and deteriorated somewhat; it is not as good to eat as it was originally. Likewise, a dish whose appearance has changed and is not as good as it was before, and wine that has turned sour. It started to turn to vinegar, and it is no longer as good as it was. It still smells like wine, but it tastes like vinegar. On these things, one recites Shehakol. Basically, these things have been downgraded. One cannot recite their original blessing with the wording Borei, because they have deteriorated from the way they were created. They have become spoiled. It is obvious that this refers to things that one can still eat, though with difficulty. If they are not fit to eat at all, they are not included in the laws of blessings. That would be like eating wood or stones. What blessing do you make on a rock? No blessing on a rock.
“Gimel, vechen peirot shenitkalkelu mitechilat beri’atan” (third: likewise, fruit that deteriorated from the beginning of its growth). Let’s say a fruit grew in an inferior way. They are what fell from the tree before ripening. Before it ripened, it fell off the tree; that is called novlot. An unripe fruit of that kind is edible, but you cannot recite Borei peri ha’etz over it. Or the opposite: it stayed on the tree too long and the sun burned it. It became overripe, so it is no longer edible in the normal way. “Hachamah venityabshu, venityabshu, birchatan Shehakol” (they were exposed to the sun and dried out; their blessing is Shehakol). It appears to me that fruit falling from the tree refers only to fruit whose normal course is never to ripen and whose way is to fall before ripening. But for fruit whose normal course is to ripen on the tree, if it fell before ripening, its blessing is Borei peri ha’etz. There are certain fruits that are never going to ripen; they are inferior. If those fruits fell from the tree, their blessing is Shehakol. But any premature fruit that fell from the tree, even if it would have ripened had it stayed on the tree, is still Borei peri ha’etz. It can ripen off the tree? All fruits, except grapes, receive Borei peri ha’etz even when they are still unripe. We learned that the rule is that all tree fruits, even before they ripen, receive Borei peri ha’etz, except boser (unripe grapes). Boser was grapes. The fruit we’re talking about here will never ripen. That could have been siman reish-beit. That is a very pointed halachah.
“Vechen al hagovai” (and likewise, over govai), which are pure grasshoppers, and over salt and salt water, one recites Shehakol. Likewise, over meat soup, one recites Shehakol. Salt has the blessing Shehakol. Where does salt come from? From the ground, you might say. It is in quarries, but it does not grow in the ground; it is in caves. If there is nothing but salt, then when someone eats the salt at the bottom of a pretzel bag after finishing the pretzels, it is no longer subordinate to the pretzel. He is eating it on its own. When you eat it with the pretzels, it is connected to them. But if he finished all the pretzels and is now putting salt in his mouth, that is Shehakol. It is no longer subordinate to the pretzel; he already ate the pretzel.
“Be’ofen she’ein sham rak marak bilvad” (when there is nothing there but soup): you have only meat soup. We are not talking about vegetables and other things in it; we’ll get to vegetables soon. “Ve’ilu yesh bah eizeh davar ma’achal, birchatah kevirchat hama’achal, keshe’ochlam yachad sheharei hama’achal ikar vehamarak tafel” (if there is some food in it, its blessing is like the blessing of the food, when they are eaten together, since the food is primary and the soup is subordinate). That’s a big chiddush. He holds that whenever there is something in the soup, that item becomes the ikar (primary item), and the soup becomes tafel (subordinate). You make the blessing on the ikar, and it covers the tafel. “Ela im ken hayah hama’achal hu me’at me’od ve’eino ba ela latet ta’am bahamarak kemo zupa” (unless the food is very slight and is there only to flavor the soup, like zupa). Zupa—keep that word. Then the soup is the ikar, and one recites Shehakol. The details of this will be explained in siman reish-hei.
“Ve’al kema’in” (and over kema’in). Do you know what kema’in is? Truffles. That’s a big Moroccan item. The truffles come from thunder? They’re underneath the ground, and when it thunders, they get scared and pop out of the ground. Even today, they’re like mushrooms, actually pitriyot. Mushrooms that they call shumlach—when they want to—receive Borei peri ha’etz when eaten on their own? What? On their own. When they buy them on their own, after they have been cooked, their blessing is Shehakol. The rule there is that they do not grow from the ground. They grow on the ground, but they are not sustained by the ground; they are sustained by the environment. They are fungi. Even though they also draw nourishment from the ground, their growth comes from the air. One cannot recite Borei peri ha’adamah over them. Kema’in are considered things created beneath the ground and created from the earth. There are fats in the ground, and these things come from those deposits. Pitriyot are a different kind; sometimes they grow on trees, on the sides of trees. Regarding the permission, it appears that after the fact, if one recited ha’adamah over them, he fulfills the obligation. But since they do not absorb nourishment from the ground, it is obvious that if they are put in a dish, they are subordinate to the dish. We said that about kora—kora, kora. Kora. Now we’re talking about hearts of palm, palmetto. It is the soft top of a date palm. The palm itself becomes soft before it hardens. They cut it before it hardens, and that becomes the heart of palm, which people eat as a delicacy. Rashi explains that the soft part of the palm is soft when its new branches grow each year. In the second year it hardens and becomes like wood. As it grows, it is soft; if you leave it on the tree, it becomes bark. You have to catch it in the first year. It is fit to eat while it is soft, and its blessing is Shehakol, because people do not plant the palm with the intention of getting kora from it. Today, maybe things have changed and people grow it for that, but in those days they grew it for the date tree. Therefore, Shehakol: it is not the ikar item. One might ask: shouldn’t it at least receive ha’adamah, like vetzlaf and hakafriksin? We learned above that when an item is not the primary item, it is downgraded, so lechatchilah (from the outset) you should downgrade kora from etz to adamah. As he wrote in se’if katan peh-tet, it is not similar. With vetzlaf, people know that they eat the kapparis; it is just that the fruit is not the ikar. Therefore, it goes down only one level, from etz to adamah. But the person planting the palm does not want people to eat the kora. He plants it so that it will harden and become a tree. He does not want people to eat it, because you have to cut the tree to eat it, and then the tree is ruined. Not today, but in those days, although kora was a good-tasting item, the person planting it did not want you to eat it. Therefore, its blessing is Shehakol. He planted it so that it would harden and become wood, so it is not considered fruit at all, and its blessing is Shehakol. You’re asking: because you’re going to cut it, and then it will grow hard? No. He wanted to leave it there so it would grow into a tree. You’re cutting it before that; you’re taking it away from the tree. He did not plant it with that intention, so you cannot call it fruit that he wanted you to eat. Therefore, its blessing is Shehakol.
So, back then, might these Bizzir have been a Shehakol-type item? Why? Because they were just an afterthought? Would that apply here? Not really; it is not deteriorated. They don’t want you to eat it, right? Bizzir—pumpkin seeds. They’re growing it for the seed. Because we eat it, it’s there. It’s the same thing. Today, the bizzir custom is Shehakol, according to the Chida, but we make adamah according to Chacham Ovadiah. What do you want to say? I want to say that if it were an afterthought, something that just happened to be in the pumpkin, then that would make it… Okay, this case is a little different. This ruins it. It ruins it. Here I could say ada’ata dehachi (with that intention). The pumpkin and the seeds: eating the seeds does not hurt the pumpkin. If I eat the bizzir and the pumpkin, it does not hurt the pumpkin. Here, it is lo nata (he did not plant it for this). I don’t want you to eat it. Lo nata lahachi (he did not plant it for that purpose). Chacham Ovadiah said that the bizzir in the pumpkin is Shehakol. But in the other case he said adamah. Not today: today it is an industry. Today the bizzir is an industry. Pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, all these things are a business today. Sunflower seeds are Shehakol because they come from a flower? What’s a flower? It’s adamah. Today they grow them for that. Chacham Ovadiah said that perhaps people who make Shehakol may keep their custom, but today, since they grow them with that intention, the blessing is adamah. We read it: “Seeds of various species of fruits and grapes are commonly sold and eaten, such as sunflower seeds, pumpkin seeds, and watermelon seeds. The Chida noted the custom to recite Shehakol over the seeds, but the consensus of modern-day poskim (halachic authorities) is that in our day and age, where there is an entire industry of seeds, the proper berachah is ha’adamah. The sunflowers, pumpkins, and watermelons are grown with the intention of marketing their seeds for consumption, and therefore they are considered like ordinary vegetable products and require ha’adamah.” There you go. You heard it here first.
“Ulechen gam otam lulavei gefanim shene’echalim” (and likewise, grape leaves that are eaten). Lulavei gefanim is like grape leaves. Yabra. Yabra, right. When they are soft, their blessing is also Shehakol, because they were not planted with the intention of eating them at all. He is talking about eating them on their own. Likewise, soft almonds: “Vechen shekedim keshehem rachim” (likewise, almonds when they are soft). We once said Shehakol, but then we said that it has changed today. “Delo neta nami ada’ata demeichal kelal, ki im le’echol hagar’inim kesheyitbashlu, birchatan gam ken Shehakol” (they were not planted with the intention of eating them at all, but rather to eat the kernels when they ripen; their blessing is also Shehakol). These are soft almonds. “Ve’ochlin kelipatan hachitzonah” (they eat the outer shell). You ever see almonds when they’re still green? You can eat them; the shell is edible while it is green. They are not planted so that people will eat them at that stage, but only when they ripen, so their blessing is Shehakol. It is not like boser. With boser, people eat the fruit; here, they eat the peel. People do not plant with the intention of eating the peel. That is the discussion about almonds.
“Ve-lachen ha-ochel sharbitin shel kitniyot be-odan lechin yerokin” (and likewise, one who eats pods of legumes while they are still soft and green) recites Shehakol. Sharbitin is like string beans, the beans that are in the pod. The reason is that the primary purpose of planting them is for the pods and legumes to dry, and then the pods are not fit for people to eat. There are those who say that this applies to legumes in the fields. But in a garden, where a small quantity of legumes is planted to eat while they are soft, one recites ha’adamah over the pods as well as the legumes, because they were planted with that intention. We have to look at all these edamame and other things people eat today. Today that is an industry; they eat it, including the pod. Does that make a Shehakol or ha’adamah? Edamame is a different item. Edamame is a pod, and there are beans in the pod. With string beans you eat the outside, but with edamame you eat the inside. There are those who say that when one eats the pods on their own, one recites only Shehakol. This seems correct: even if we say they were planted to be eaten, they are still like the capers of vetzlaf, since the main intention is for the legumes, not the pods. Therefore, one should recite Shehakol, which fulfills the obligation according to all opinions. However, if one eats them together with the legumes, one recites ha’adamah and that also covers the pods, because they are subordinate to the legumes.
We already said Shehakol before. “Ve’al chaziz”—what is chaziz? “Vehu shachat” (it is shachat). Shachat is like grass, or grain that has not yet ripened. It is grain that has not reached a third of its growth. Its blessing is Shehakol because its growth is not complete. But what did we just say about fruit of the tree? If it has not completed its growth, you make etz, except for boser. Here you’re telling me that unripe wheat gets Shehakol. What is the explanation? Even though with fruit of the tree one recites ha’etz, including boser, as he wrote in se’if reish-beit, se’if yud-zayin, one can say that anything that has not grown a third is not even like boser among tree fruits. It is worse than unripe fruit. It’s like stones? No, not like stones, because you would not make a blessing at all on stones. Here you make Shehakol. It is not that the grain has not ripened; it has not grown yet. It is edible, but you cannot yet call it a fruit. This is also implied by the wording of the Tur and Shulchan Aruch, which call it shachat. They did not even call it grain that had not grown. It is not in the category of grain; it is called shachat, a different name. In Bava Batra it is explained that shachat is animal feed. We just learned in the Rambam that shachat is animal feed. According to this, once it has left the category of shachat, even if it has not completed its ripening, one recites ha’adamah. That is after it has reached a third? Right, after a third, exactly. Therefore, it is surprising that someone wrote that for every fruit of the ground that has not completed its ripening, one recites Shehakol. That is not so. It should not be worse than a tree fruit that has not completed ripening and receives etz. It just has to be called a fruit already. Someone asked: perhaps that fruit cannot ripen, while the others that fell from the tree unripe can ripen. This one can never ripen; it is too premature. No, if you leave it in the ground, it will mature. But it is already shachat, out of the ground. If you had left it in the ground, it would have matured, but he took it out before it was even called chitah. The other cases are still called fruit; they are just fruit that did not ripen. Here it is not even called wheat; it is called shachat. In my humble opinion, it is clear that this is not so. This is like boser among tree fruit, over which one recites ha’etz. Likewise, for fruit of the ground, one recites ha’adamah. There is no reason to distinguish between tree fruit and ground fruit. How do we know that? Who told you to distinguish between etz and adamah? It is also surprising that the Tur and Shulchan Aruch did not write that chaziz from the garden receives Borei peri ha’adamah, since this is explicit in the Gemara, and the Tosafot wrote so there. Let’s open the books to reish-daled. Halachah alef: “Al davar she’ein gidulo min ha’aretz” (over something that does not grow from the ground), such as animal meat, wild animals and birds, fish, eggs, milk, cheese, spoiled bread, a dish whose appearance has changed and deteriorated, novlot—dates that ripened, were exposed to the sun, and dried out—grasshoppers, salt, salt water, soup, kema’in, pitriyot, and kora. That is quite a shopping list. What do you want? People eat them? Of course. What do you want to do with them? Some of them are kosher. Of course. Chocolate-covered grasshoppers? Every Yom Tov, every holiday, we have them. What are you talking about? Mansura’s has them.
The gloss says that kora is the addition that grows on the tree each year, called palmetto. That is the heart of palm. It also says grape leaves and almonds. Hold on, you’re still going. Grape leaves—that’s the yabra. Yabra, right. And “shekedim metukim, she’ochlim otam keshehem dakim beklippatam” (sweet almonds that are eaten while they are still thin and in their shell). Their shell is still on them, but soft. Then “hachaziz”—what is chaziz? Or shachat: unripe grain. And “kara chayah” (raw gourd), and flour. People don’t eat raw gourd; that is difficult to eat. And barley flour. What is kimcha desa’arei? Barley flour, straight up. Date beer and regular beer, and barley water cooked for a sick person. Also, a certain kind of wild herb that is not planted, and an herb called anitoy. Shevet is like dill. Then cumin and coriander, different kinds of spices. Vinegar mixed with water until it is fit to drink receives Shehakol. These are all the cases. Read the Aruch Hashulchan in yud as well, because the first section has more examples. Likewise, date beer and barley beer receive Shehakol, even though the main ingredient is dates or barley. Once it has become a drink, its main identity is that of water. It is not like the water from cooked vegetables, over which we recite the vegetable’s blessing. Why? There, the taste of the vegetables enters the water. But beer has a different taste from the dates or barley, so it has a different blessing. Likewise, barley water cooked for a sick person: as long as the main intention is for the water, one recites Shehakol. That does not mean only for a sick person; the same law applies to a healthy person who cooks a barley dish when his intention is not for the barley at all, but for the water, adding only a little barley to flavor it. He also recites Shehakol. That case is uncommon, because generally, when someone cooks a dish, his intention is for the barley, and he recites Borei minei mezonot. The details will be explained in siman resh-chet. The Tur writes in the name of the Ravad about “isbei dedabra” (wild grasses), which are not planted. They receive Shehakol because, since they are not planted, they are not considered fruit. But someone must have planted them; the seeds fell on the ground, but they weren’t planted. The explanation is that these fruits are important even though they are not planted, like our berries or nuts, over which we recite ha’adamah or ha’etz. But herbs, since they have no importance and are not planted, are not included among fruits, and one does not recite ha’adamah over them. Even in South Africa, we would make ha’adamah? No, there they grow them for that. This is wild, wild herbs growing in a field. Since they have no importance and are not planted, they are not considered fruit, and one does not recite ha’adamah over them. Therefore, one recites Shehakol over sevevu. It is some kind of wild grass; we have to see what it is. That is the custom. There is someone who wrote that the Ari zal would recite the blessing of the item itself over wild growth. The Ari zal did not follow this rule of Shehakol for wild things. That will make a big difference according to Rabbeinu ha-Ari regarding wild things that grow in the fields. Keep that Ari zal in mind. Perhaps he did that only with important items. Maybe he made a distinction and did it only for important things. Chrein also grows on its own. It was wild in those days; today they grow it. And over this other item—al haburikas—Shehakol. Not burekas! Okay. It says that shabta, shablalta, chamuna, and chusbarta also receive Shehakol. Why? They are herbs, and they are not eaten on their own; they are used to add flavor to something else. Where does lemon fall? Hold on. Parsley, cumin, cilantro? Pepper? Peppers can be eaten on their own. You would not say Shehakol? You say adamah on a pepper. What about black pepper? Black pepper you don’t eat alone. Let’s say someone likes to eat black pepper. Like salt? Salt you can eat alone. Black pepper, maybe there is no blessing at all. We said there is no blessing on black pepper. It will kill you to eat black pepper alone. These items, like mint, can be eaten on their own, so they receive Shehakol, because normally they are used to give flavor to something else. What about lemon and lemon juice? People eat lemons alone. The juice would be Shehakol, but a lemon can be etz. That is the rule: anything that is used for flavor receives Shehakol if you eat it on its own, assuming it is edible. “Veshabta hu mah shekorin aniyas” (shabta is what they call anise), with an ayin. Look at the bottom of the Biur Halachah. What letter is that? Chet. So we’re not going to include jalapeno in this, right? Jalapeno is still etz? A jalapeno is a pepper; you can eat it on its own. People eat it. Adamah, people eat it, though. “Veshablalta”—that is patina. Kamuna is cumin. Kusbarta is kusbera, cilantro. “Vechamun hu kimel” (chamun is caraway). Shabta and chusbarta are not known to us. We have them in our countries, but we don’t know what those two things are. At the end of se’if reish-chet, se’if gimmel, it says that another item is not blessed at all because it is not fit to eat on its own, but these are fit to eat through something else.
Now we’re starting to get the halachah lema’aseh (practical halachah) from this. He writes: over something that does not grow from the ground, such as animal meat, wild animals and birds, fish, eggs, milk, and cheese, one recites Shehakol nihyah bidvaro. If someone mistakenly recited Borei peri ha’adamah over one of them, he did not fulfill the obligation. Over kema’in and pitriyot, which do not draw nourishment from the ground, the blessing is Shehakol. If someone mistakenly recited Borei peri ha’adamah over them, he did not fulfill the obligation. He argues with the Aruch Hashulchan. We’ll get to that. The Aruch Hashulchan said that after the fact, if you recited ha’adamah over mushrooms and similar things, you fulfilled the obligation. It should be added that although mushrooms are raised on farms much like fruit and vegetables, they are still not fruit of the ground, since they do not absorb their nourishment from the ground. Farm mushrooms are grown on a thin layer of soil incapable of supporting plants. That is the point. If someone recited ha’adamah for mushrooms by mistake, Kaf Hachayim ruled that the blessing is valid. The Samei’ach Nefesh and Aruch Hashulchan concurred with this ruling. We saw the Aruch Hashulchan. However, Maran Rishon Letziyon rejected this ruling, insisting that mushrooms cannot be called fruit of the ground, since they do not absorb nourishment from the ground. Regarding infested mushrooms: Kaf Hachayim Sofer related that in Baghdad the custom was to refrain from eating mushrooms altogether, ostensibly because mushrooms are frequently infested. In communities where mushrooms are eaten, they must be examined thoroughly to make sure they are not infested. That is a problem in general.
“Hagome’a beitzah rakah chayah” (one who swallows a raw egg), or an egg put in hot water, recites Shehakol nihyah bidvaro. If he is disgusted by it and is taking it only for medicinal purposes, he does not make a blessing on it. We know that rule. One does not recite a final blessing after swallowing an egg. That’s a good question: what is the final blessing if someone swallows a raw egg? Since some say that the law of a soft-boiled egg is like that of a drink, and it does not contain a revi’it, there is no revi’it; you only have a kezayit, so if you treat it as a liquid, it’s a Catch-22. Then it’s like in Rocky, right? He put five eggs in there. Five eggs—Rocky has to make a final blessing too. You have to check where… He said nefashot. Rocky 3; he said nefashot. He got religious in Rocky 3.
“Al melach ve’al mei melach” (over salt and salt water), one recites Shehakol nihyah bidvaro, provided that there is at least some enjoyment. Specifically, he tastes a little, in a way that gives enjoyment to the palate. But if he eats a lot of salt or drinks a lot of salt water, he does not recite a blessing at all. I guess that when he eats a lot of it, he has no enjoyment. Why is he doing it? God knows. Even a little salt is specifically when the salt is fit to eat somewhat and is not too sharp, like the salt at the bottom of pretzel bags. Likewise, salt water must be drinkable. Over vinegar by itself, one recites nothing because it harms him. That is mazik (harmful). Look at resh-shin, halachah bet. Read it: “Hamayim shebishelu vahem yerakot, mevarech haberachah atzmah” (over water in which vegetables were cooked, one recites the blessing itself). Continue: one recites over the vegetables themselves, even if the water has only the taste of the vegetables. Continue: if meat was cooked with them, but the vegetables were removed with the meat, one recites Shehakol. That is resh-shin bet. But he says here, resh-shin se’if bet, “chometz levado, eno mevarech kelum” (over vinegar by itself, one recites nothing), so he obviously has the wrong reference. It must be bet in resh-daled. Read daled, resh-daled bet: “Al hachometz levado eno mevarech kelum, mipene shehu maziko” (over vinegar by itself, one recites nothing because it harms him). That’s it: straight vinegar, no blessing. That is specifically strong vinegar, so strong that it bubbles when you put it on the ground. But vinegar that is not so strong gives enjoyment, and some say Shehakol. Wine that began to turn sour smells like wine but tastes like vinegar. Even if it harms him? If it harms him, he recites nothing, because it harms him. But vinegar that is not so strong certainly gives him enjoyment, and he needs to recite a blessing. The question is whether the vinegar is strong enough to harm him. If it is strong, it harms him, like olive oil that harms him; we said one does not recite a blessing over olive oil when it harms him. That is specifically strong vinegar that bubbles when it is thrown down. But vinegar that is not so strong certainly gives enjoyment and requires a blessing. Chazak baruch. It gives him enjoyment. Even though it is harmful, what do I care? We have enjoyment. He asks us about “over vinegar by itself, one recites nothing because it harms him.” In the Mishnah Berurah, it says that vinegar that is not so strong certainly gives him enjoyment and requires a blessing. Is it discussing vinegar that harms him? If it harms him, then according to your position you would not recite a blessing over candies. That harms you. Yes, that harms your teeth. The Rambam says that honey is harmful. Some people eat things that are harmful. The rule here is that if he gets enjoyment from it, even though it is harmful, he recites a blessing. We recite blessings over things that harm the body. Fried food, for example, or anything that is not healthy: we make blessings over things that are harmful to the body, even though doctors say they are harmful.
Anyway, he says that date wine receives Shehakol nihyah bidvaro. Grasshoppers—what is the blessing on grasshoppers? Someone is going to eat them. Give them to him for the holiday. Don’t worry, I’m not eating them. What is the blessing, Albert? Shehakol. And over spoiled bread, one recites Shehakol nihyah bidvaro. Let’s get to the cases that are relevant. Moldy bread. He says here that the proper blessing for plain grape leaves is Shehakol. Let’s get to that. What does Maran say about grape leaves? Shehakol. Right, this is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch. What if you have yebra? What if there is rice? Let’s start with my case. What’s the matter with my case? My case is the ruling of Maran.
Regarding young vine growth, and likely the same applies to the leaves, the Acharonim (later halachic authorities) explained that this is because grapevines are not planted in order to harvest anything other than grapes. The matter is not simple, however. Above, in siman 202, it was explained that Maran ruled that the correct blessing for caper leaves, since the caper was considered a secondary item, should be adamah. So, apparently, you would want to say that grape leaves should also be downgraded to adamah. Why did he make it Shehakol? In more ancient times, people cultivated caper plants to eat their leaves. Therefore, although the plants themselves are trees, the blessing for the edible parts is Borei peri ha’adamah. Nowadays, no one grows caper plants for their leaves. Therefore, the blessing is demoted to Shehakol. Regarding grape leaves, if someone has a vine in his yard, there is no question that its purpose is to produce grapes, not leaves. Therefore, the blessing on the leaves would be Shehakol. Commercially sold grape leaves, however, are grown on the vines principally for this purpose. Therefore, the berachah (blessing) has to be adamah. Sure, a person is not growing grapevines in his backyard; he is getting them from a store. It is interesting that the blessing can differ. It depends on the kavanah (intention). The Yalkut Yosef ruled that the correct blessing for yebra is Borei peri ha’adamah, because he considered the leaf to be its main ingredient. There is no doubt that this was such a basic food in Aleppo that people grew grapevines purposely to harvest the leaves, besides the grapes. In this light, it seems that the correct blessing for commercially sold grape leaves is Borei peri ha’adamah, following the ruling of Birkat Hashem. Unlike that ruling, the Sefer Sha’ar HaBerachah ruled that the correct blessing is Shehakol, since people grow grapevines for the grapes and not for anything else. But apparently, today they grow them for the leaves. The question is that stuffed grape leaves are a different item. We’re getting to stuffed grape leaves; we haven’t discussed them yet. We’re discussing grape leaves now. Yebra! Yebra is the leaf. Just the leaf? What do you think yebra is? You don’t speak Arabic? You were born in Chalab, weren’t you? Where were you born? Aleppo. You were born in Chalab and you don’t know what yebra is? Go step by step. Don’t jump ahead to what you know. The grape leaf itself, when it is grown commercially today, even though Maran said Shehakol, would today be adamah.
Rabbi Shaul Kassin, in Peri Tzaddik, stated that other scholars maintained that the rule regarding grape leaves is the same as the rule regarding caper leaves, and therefore the correct blessing is Borei peri ha’adamah. He argued that there is a fundamental difference: caper leaves are eaten plain while raw, whereas grape leaves are eaten stuffed with rice and meat and cooked. Therefore, if you can eat a leaf on its own, its blessing is Shehakol nihyah vidvaro. You know what he wanted to say? Chacham Shaul Kassin from Peri Tzaddik wanted to say that there is a difference with the caper. The caper is demoted because you eat it alone. Nobody eats grape leaves alone; they eat them with stuffing, and therefore it goes down two levels to Shehakol. If you eat it plain, its blessing is Shehakol. That is what he wanted to say, and that is where he is going: “al alei gefanim mevarech Shehakol nihyah bidvaro” (over grape leaves, one recites Shehakol). He is returning to the Shulchan Aruch. It is not simple. He took us away from there, and now he brought us back. Right, because there are two ways to go here. Kaf Hachayim related that the rabbis in Aleppo once examined several orchards and found that the grape leaves were invariably infested with tiny insects. Rav Shlomo Laniado, together with his colleagues, ruled that it was forbidden to eat grape leaves because of this. They made a cherem (ban) in Halab. Do you have Rabbi David Sutton’s book on the rabbis of Aleppo? He has the cherem on yebra. In the old days it was a very important item. The rabbis got up on Shabbat and said, “No more yebra, because they’re infested.” It was a built-in cherem in all the communities. Why did we reinstate it? No, in America it is a different process. Rav Chaim Abulafia likewise ruled that they are forbidden, and the rabbis of Yerushalayim and Chevron agreed with the ruling. The Jews in Baghdad considered grape leaves no more kosher than pork. Which means that if they ate them, they would not be allowed to recite a berachah. That’s correct. Even if they found them and cleaned them? You can’t clean them; they’re infested with bugs. Some poskim (halachic authorities) ruled more leniently, but only if the leaves are thoroughly examined. Yalkut Yosef, page 220, wrote, “Anyone who has the proper measure of fear of Heaven will refrain from eating grape leaves.” The Sefer Tola’at Shani reports that recent laboratory tests reveal that nowadays hardly any grape leaves are infested, since the vines are treated with insecticides. That’s healthy. The leaves of untreated vines, however, are heavily infested. Store-bought grape leaves are rinsed and soaked, but there is no doubt that a large number of insects remain. We need to get Ilan back on the phone. Where’s Ilan? He left us; we need the expert. What do we do today? We have yebra every day. No, we don’t need it; we have it here.
Now the question is: what do we do with the stuffed grape leaves? That is a separate item. But because I know you’re not going to have patience, I’ll give it to you now. Really, this is not the right place, but some guys are going to have yebra for lunch, so we have to discuss it. Don’t mention the names; we’re not publicizing different establishments. We’re not endorsing anyone. So now you want to make a ruling. By the way, a lot of you are 50 years old. What have you been doing all this time? You’ve been eating yebra for 50 years. What blessing did you make? Usually we make hamotzi (Who brings forth bread). Usually hamotzi. When don’t you make hamotzi? Monday night, when you’re not making hamotzi. Exactly. What blessing did you make on yebra? There are three options: either adamah because of the grape leaf, Shehakol because of the meat, or mezonot because of the rice. I usually make a blessing on other things and leave the yebra for last. The stuffed yebra always has rice, though. Usually I would make mezonot. I’m asking you: you have yebra on the table. What is the blessing on yebra? What’s inside? Rice and meat. Gary has to go first because he’s in the food business, so we have to give him credit. He says there’s rice in the yebra. Therefore, it becomes mezonot because of the rice. But is there a rule that when you have rice in something it automatically trumps everything? He says to try mezonot. Mezonot trumps everything? Not rice. I want to know the rule you’re proposing. Rice is mezonot; you got that right. But now you might be confusing a rule that mezonot trumps everything with a rule that might apply only to actual mezonot items made from grains. Rice is not considered a grain. The proof is that you can’t make rice for your matzah. Therefore, rice cannot become chametz. So the rule of kol sheyesh bo does not apply to rice. We know, Rabbi. But you still might be right, just not for the reason you gave. “I say Shehakol.” So you say Shehakol. Why? Because you’re going after the meat. “I’m eating it for the meat.” You’re eating it for the meat. Your main item is the little bit of meat in there, even though there’s a majority of rice? No, there’s a majority of rice? You’re creating a rule that even though there is a majority, you go by what you want it for. “I want the meat, even if there are only a few morsels of meat in there. I go by the meat and throw out the rule of majority.” Chazak uvaruch. That’s a beauty of a rule. Everybody’s creating their own rules here. Joey Haber has another rule: because the first thing you bite is the leaf, that is what you make the blessing on. That is the contact rule, like an M&M. Another rule we’ve never heard before. He doesn’t know what’s inside the M&M; it’s a surprise. It’s a piñata; there could be toys inside. So Joey Haber has a new rule: whatever reaches your teeth first is what you make the berachah on. Another person says, “Crack it open and do an experiment.” Put it on the—crack it open, Moshe. What’s in there? Look at it. After you look at it, what do you recite, birkat hare’iyah (the blessing on seeing something)? She’asah nisim la’avoteinu (Who performed miracles for our ancestors). Footnote! We created a new law, and now we’re making a footnote on the law. It goes by rov (majority), but if the first thing you’re eating is covered, you have to take the cover into account. I hear you. But you can’t go by rov when you have this. By the way, you thought it was so complicated that there wouldn’t even be any notes on it. There is a note here.
“Alei gefanim shememula’im be’orez uvasar, shenikra’im yabrak” (grape leaves stuffed with rice and meat, called yabrak). The rice is the rov. “Ikar, mevarech Borei minei mezonot. Shekeivan sherov hama’achal orez uvasar ve’ikar kavanat ha’ochel hi al ha’orez lis’od halev velo al hatzipui shehu rak alim be’alma” (the primary item is rice, so one recites Borei minei mezonot, since most of the food is rice and meat and the eater’s main intention is to eat the rice, not the covering, which is merely leaves). That is Chacham Ovadiah. The same applies to stuffed vegetables, like mahshi: stuffed peppers, onions, cabbage, and eggplant. The main objective in eating these foods is the stuffing. Therefore, the proper blessing, since the way they made their mahshi is mostly rice—which is not the way we make it—is Borei minei mezonot. Although there is meat in the stuffing, the majority ingredient is usually rice. That’s the way the Shamis make it. The Halabis put mostly meat; the rice is just there as a marker, to hold it together. This is the ruling of Chacham Shaul Kassin in Sefer Peri Tzaddik regarding stuffed grape leaves. He compared it to the halachah in the Shulchan Aruch that when one eats a condiment on a thin cracker, the cracker is subordinate to the condiment, and one must recite the blessing appropriate for the condiment. When eating these foods, one’s objective is only the condiment and not the cracker. On the other hand, the Sefer Vayakhel Yosef Sitthon wrote that the grape leaves are considered the principal ingredient since they hold the rice in place. Therefore, the proper blessing should be Borei peri ha’adamah. So we already have a dispute. One wants to say that the filling is the ikar; this is Chacham Sitthon in Vayakhel Yosef. You’re asking me another question. Let’s stick to yabrak first. Maran Harishon LeTziyon agreed with Rav Kassin that the proper blessing is Borei minei mezonot, since one’s main objective is eating the food in the stuffing, not the leaves. If the stuffing is mainly meat, then the proper blessing should be Shehakol nihyah vidvaro. So there you go. You have to ask your wife how she makes it. After 50 years of eating yabrak, you can finally ask her, “How do you make the yabrak?” She’ll ask, “What have you been doing all this time?” You can say, “I’ve been eating. Now I’m learning the laws of blessings and starting to make blessings for the first time in my life.” If she tells you that the rov is meat, which is the way we make it, that’s it. If you go to the Chacham, he said mezonot. In all these cases, the food’s appearance is not the determining factor. It is rather what the majority ingredient is and the person’s intention.
The Sefer Birkhot Shamayim Dwek—let’s see what he says. The Kol Yaakov came out with their book on the laws of blessings. It says that the custom among Syrian Jews is to recite Borei peri ha’adamah for yabrak, agreeing with Vayakhel Yosef. Nevertheless, it is recommended to follow the ruling of Rav Kassin in Peri Tzaddik, which Maran Harishon LeTziyon agreed with. This is especially important in light of the fact that sometimes there is more meat. If someone recites Borei minei mezonot, at least his blessing is definitely valid. If he says adamah… Any time he quotes that book, he rejects it; he brings the book down to shambles. What is the logic? He says that Rabbi Sutton held that you make the blessing on the grape leaves, because he considered the grape leaves the ikar. But there is a problem: if there is a majority of rice and you said adamah, you did not fulfill the obligation. So you’re always better off making mezonot. After the fact, you fulfill the obligation with everything? Not adamah. Under no circumstances does adamah cover rice? I don’t think so. The Sefer Vezot Haberakhah ruled that in such a case, when the volume of the grape leaves is greater than the stuffing, one must recite Shehakol nihyah vidvaro. The leaves are always going to be greater because they’re wrapped up? Some people put in a lot of leaf. No, it’s a thin little thing. But if the volume is greater—for example, if it is wrapped many times—he says Shehakol. Although Vayakhel Yosef ruled that the blessing for stuffed grape leaves is Borei peri ha’adamah, that is because he considered the grape leaves to be the primary ingredient. Nowadays, we consider the leaf subordinate to the stuffing, because usually the stuffing has a greater volume. If the leaf has a greater volume than the stuffing, or if one is eating plain grape leaves, the proper blessing is Shehakol. He held above that the blessing is Shehakol because there is a doubt about what the blessing is today. So, on a regular grape leaf… We tackled this issue 12 years ago. Let’s see if we tackled it correctly. The basic principle—got it? Now go all the way down. In light of this principle, let us consider mahshi and yabrak, two foods commonly eaten on Shabbat. Mahshi is essentially eggplant stuffed with rice and meat—we discussed eggplant separately—and yabrak is grape leaves stuffed with rice. Chacham Ovadiah Yosef, in the aforementioned work, cites Rav Shaul Kassin in Peri Tzaddik, who says that it is the stuffing, rather than the eggplant or grape leaves, that constitutes the primary component of mahshi and yabrak. Hence, the berachah is determined by the majority ingredient of the stuffing. If the meat comprises the majority, then one recites Shehakol; if the rice is the majority, then one recites Mezonot. The berachah covers the entire dish, the stuffing as well as the eggplant or grape leaves. Rabbi, I was right. That’s it. But did you hear what he said? You first said Shehakol if it is meat, and Mezonot if there is rice. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, because all our yabrak has more meat. No, it has more rice. The Shamash people make it that way. Halabis, we put in more meat. They call it something else; I don’t know. What if you have parve yabrak? Mezonot. Very good. Parve yabrak, Mezonot. The Lebanese are always—can’t eat it. What about melabbes? Then take one grain of rice out and make Shehakol; now you have more meat. It’s 50/50. Take one grain out and make Shehakol. I have a little problem with it: the first thing you bite into in the yabrak is the leaf. We’ll go slowly. If you hold that it’s subordinate, it is just holding the stuffing. It’s like a bag, a holder, a package, an envelope. You’re not eating the envelope; you want the stuffing. But I thought there was something about what you bite into first. What do we do with melabbes? Melabbes is a separate item. It could be that both are ikar: the sugar could be ikar and the almond could be ikar. Some say two blessings; some say after the fact. We didn’t follow that. Rabbi Sitton is the other one who said to go by whichever is ikar, but the Chachamim and Halachah Berurah disagree with him. Chacham Ovadiah disagreed with him too. He is not saying that because it reached your mouth first. He is saying that because it is the ikar. There is no concept of the item that reached your mouth first. A Kit Kat doesn’t change because the chocolate hits your mouth first. The blessing is mezonot. It is mezonot even though the chocolate hits your mouth first. Exactly. All right, today is a historical day in the yeshiva: we established a berachah for yabra. You have to cut it first, though. You have to know exactly what’s in it. You have to cut it up and dissect it. If you don’t know who the caterer is, cut it up. Usually you know who the caterer is. If you see everybody wearing pointy shoes, you know it’s the Shamis. Check the shoes. Instead of opening up the yabra, look at everybody’s shoes. If they all have pointy shoes, you make mezonot; with regular shoes, you make…