We are beginning siman 8. The Chayei Adam discusses a situation in which a person makes a bracha believing that they are making the correct bracha on the item they are holding, but then realizes they made the wrong bracha for that item. However, there are items in front of them which are of the bracha he mistakenly made. The Chayei Adam gives the example of a person making a borei pri hagefen thinking that they are holding a cup of wine, but, after finishing the bracha, realizes that the cup is filled with water. If there is wine on the table, as long as the person has not spoken, they can pour themselves wine and extend the bracha they made to the cup of wine. The Chayei Adam explains that this works since the wine was in front of him, and since his intent when making the bracha was for wine. Even if the person only had in mind to drink one cup’s worth of liquid, the bracha can still be extended to the cup of wine, since the wine was the true intention of the bracha.
The Chayei Adam adds that not all poskim agree to this psak, and refers the learner to Klal 5. There, he brings a discussion regarding a person who makes a bracha on a food, and, before having a chance to take a bite, the food falls from their hand and becomes unfit for consumption. Although the food upon which the bracha was recited is inedible, there is another food of the same bracha present which is edible. The poskim discuss whether the bracha originally made on one item can be “switched” to another item. The Shulchan Aruch holds the bracha cannot be switched, and one would need to make a new bracha on the second food. The Rama holds the bracha can be switched, as long as the person had in mind at the time of the bracha that they planned to eat the second item as well. The Mishnah Berurah agrees with the Rama, and adds that even if one did not have intent to include the item in their bracha, as long as it was in front of them at the time of the bracha, it is also included in the bracha. The MIshnah Berurah’s opinion regarding a “switched” bracha can be extended to our case of an extended bracha, and one would not need to make a new bracha as long as they had intent for the second item, or it was in front of them.
In our Klal, regarding a mistaken bracha, the Chayei Adam seems to hold somewhere between the Shulchan Aruch and Rama. He holds that the bracha will cover the second drink only because the intent of the person making the bracha was to drink something of that sort (e.g., in our case, wine). If we were to extend the Chayei Adam to a case of a mistaken food, if a person made a bracha on an apple thinking it was a peach, they would be able to extend their bracha to an actual peach if it was present at the time of the bracha, because that was his original intent when making the bracha. However, we would not be able to conclude anything from our Klal regarding a situation of an item which becomes inedible.
However, in Klal 5, the Chayei Adam holds in accordance with the Mishnah Berurah. Thus, we can extend his psak over there to our Klal, regarding a mistaken bracha, and one would not need to make a new bracha as long as they had intent for the second item, or it was in front of them.
- One who makes a mistaken bracha on the item they are holding, or who makes the correct bracha but the item becomes inedible, if there is another item of the correct/same bracha in front of them:
- The Shulchan Aruch holds one must make a new bracha, and this is the psak of the Sephardim.
- The Rama, Mishnah Berurah and Chayei Adam hold one does not need to make a new bracha, provided the item was in front of them at the time of the bracha, or they had intent to cover it in their bracha. This is the psak of the Ashkenazim.