The Laws of Pat Haba’ah Bekisnin

In the Gemara (Berachot 41–42) it is explained that pat haba’ah bekisnin has special laws, both regarding the first blessing [its blessing is Mezonot and not Hamotzi] and regarding the after-blessing [Al HaMichyah, unless one eats an amount that constitutes establishing a meal], as will be explained below.

The definition of pat haba’ah bekisnin

The Rishonim disagree as to what pat haba’ah bekisnin is, and the Beit Yosef and the Shulchan Aruch (siman 168, se’if 7) bring three opinions on the matter:
[1] Bread dough kneaded with flour and water and made like pockets (therefore called kisnin), which are filled with honey, sugar, nuts, almonds, or spices [the opinion of Rabbeinu Chananel (cited in Sefer HaAruch, entry kasan), Rabbeinu Yonah (Berachot 29a, s.v. she’ein), and the Rashba (Berachot 41b, s.v. nimtza), and so ruled the Tur].
[2] A baked dough kneaded from flour and water together with honey, oil, milk, or spices [the opinion of the Rambam (Hilchot Berachot 3:9), Rashi (Berachot 41b, s.v. pat haba’ah bekisnin; however see Taz, s.k. 6)].
[3] Dough made from regular dough but prepared dry, like dry crackers, which are crunched (similar to crispbread; dry bread in Aramaic is kisnin) [the opinion of Rav Hai Gaon (cited there in the Aruch)].
In practice, the Beit Yosef wrote (and this was ruled in the Shulchan Aruch, se’if 7) that since in cases of doubt regarding blessings we are lenient, one should rule in accordance with all three above opinions leniently. That is, on all three types listed above [filled with sweets, kneaded with sweets, and crunchy], one recites Mezonot and Al HaMichyah, unless one eats from them an amount that constitutes establishing a meal, in which case their blessing is Hamotzi and Birkat HaMazon.

The question of the Acharonim: why does the rule of doubtful blessings determine that one recites Mezonot?

According to the words of the Rishonim, it emerges that every yeast cake and the like, and every rugelach, are a doubt whether they are bread [Hamotzi] or pat haba’ah bekisnin [Mezonot]. For according to Rabbeinu Chananel their blessing is Mezonot, since they are filled with sweet ingredients, and according to the Rambam as well their blessing is Mezonot, since they are kneaded with sweet ingredients; but according to Rav Hai Gaon their blessing is Hamotzi, since they are not crunchy.
Likewise, every bagel is a doubt between Hamotzi and Mezonot, for according to the Rambam and Rabbeinu Chananel its blessing is Hamotzi, since it is not filled and not kneaded with sweet ingredients [in a case where it contains no oil], but according to Rav Hai Gaon its blessing is Mezonot, since it is crunchy.
Indeed, the Bach challenged the words of the Beit Yosef and Shulchan Aruch, who ruled that their blessing is Mezonot because of the principle of being lenient in doubtful blessings: what relevance does doubtful blessings have here, since in any event one recites one blessing—either Mezonot or Hamotzi?
Similarly, Rabbi Akiva Eiger asked (in his glosses to the Shulchan Aruch): why was it not ruled that in any case where all three conditions are not met, one should eat them only within a meal in order to avoid the doubt, as we find (in se’if 13) that a God-fearing person should eat sufganin only within a meal in order to satisfy all opinions [and in truth, the Bach’s opinion is that in such a case they should be eaten only within a meal].

Resolving the questions

The Taz (there, s.k. 6; and similarly the Derishah) answered the Bach’s question: since if one recites Mezonot one has fulfilled the obligation in any case [even according to the opinions that this is full-fledged bread], because the blessing of Mezonot exempts all nourishing foods, it follows that whenever the item is not bread according to all opinions, it is preferable to recite Mezonot and thereby fulfill the obligation according to everyone, rather than recite Hamotzi and Birkat HaMazon, thereby reciting the three blessings of Birkat HaMazon which one may be exempt from. Therefore the rule of leniency in doubtful blessings determines that one recites Mezonot and Al HaMichyah.
The Maamar Mordechai (cited in Biur Halacha, s.v. vehalacha, and likewise in Aruch HaShulchan, se’if 23) answered that perhaps the three opinions regarding the definition of pat haba’ah bekisnin do not disagree with one another at all, and each merely gave an example of pat haba’ah bekisnin; in practice, each opinion agrees with the others. Therefore, if one of the three conditions is not present, according to all opinions one should not recite Hamotzi and Birkat HaMazon, but rather Mezonot and Al HaMichyah.
According to the Maamar Mordechai, this is not a ruling based on “doubtful blessings are treated leniently,” but is accepted according to all opinions. However, the Beit Yosef, who wrote to be lenient because of “safek berachot lehakel,” appears to hold that the three opinions disagree with one another.

Why Birkat HaMazon is not recited on cake

One must examine why we recite Al HaMichyah on rugelach or on bagels, when this is a Torah-level doubt regarding Birkat HaMazon (in a case where one became satiated from eating the cake while others would not become satiated; see siman 168, se’if 6) [and here the Beit Yosef’s answer of safek berachot lehakel is not relevant, for that explains only the first blessing].
Rabbi Akiva Eiger answered (in his glosses to Even HaOzer, siman 168) that since one who recites Al HaMichyah on bread has fulfilled the Torah obligation, and only rabbinically must go back and bless (see siman 168, Shaar HaTziyun, s.k. 71), therefore in a doubt whether something is bread or pat haba’ah bekisnin, we recite Al HaMichyah.

Washing hands for cake and bagels

One must further examine why we do not wash hands [without the blessing of Al Netilat Yadayim] before eating cake or bagels, and why we do not act stringently to wash hands, which is an easy action, out of concern that the cake has the status of bread (see siman 160, se’if 11).

Zimun when three ate cakes or bagels

One must further examine why we do not make a zimun when three people eat cakes or bagels together [of course they would not say “Elokeinu” when ten eat together, because of the doubt], since zimun is an easy matter; why not avoid the doubt?

The blessing of Shehakol on water after eating cake and bagels

One must further examine why, when drinking water after eating cake, we recite Shehakol over the water and are not concerned for the opinions that these items have the status of bread, in which case within a bread meal one does not recite a blessing over water (see siman 174, se’if 7). Therefore, it would seemingly be proper not to recite a blessing over water after eating cake and bagels.
In the responsa HaElef Lecha Shlomo (Orach Chaim, siman 86), he answered that since the reason one does not recite a blessing on water within a bread meal is that no fixed meal exists without drinking, therefore with cakes and bagels, even though they are a doubtful form of bread, they are still considered casual eating, and with casual eating there can be eating without drinking; therefore one must recite a blessing on the water.

A practical difference between the Maamar Mordechai and the Beit Yosef

In truth, all these discussions depend on the above dispute between the Beit Yosef and the Maamar Mordechai. According to the Beit Yosef, each opinion disagrees with the others, and every cake is therefore a doubtful bread. But according to the Maamar Mordechai, all opinions agree, and bread filled with sweet ingredients, or kneaded with sweet ingredients, or crunchy, is according to all opinions not bread. It follows that cake is not bread according to all opinions, and therefore one does not wash hands for it, one recites a blessing on water drunk afterward, and so on.

The blessing of Mezonot within a bread meal

Question: On which foods does one recite Mezonot within a bread meal?
Answer: [1] On foods in which all three conditions of pat haba’ah bekisnin are met [filled with sweet ingredients, kneaded with sweet ingredients, and crunchy], provided one does not eat them for satiation. One should know that it is uncommon to find foods in which all three conditions are present; below some foods will be listed in which all three conditions are indeed present, and therefore one should recite Mezonot on them when eating them within a bread meal. [2] On foods that do not have the status of bread, such as food cooked in water or deep-fried in oil, even if one eats them for satiation, unless they come because of the meal. One should know that most cooked dishes come because of the meal [such as noodles], and therefore one does not recite Mezonot on them within the meal. However, Bisli that is deep-fried in oil [as is common in Israel] does not come because of the meal, and one recites Mezonot on it within the meal, as below.
[3] “Chavitza” — that is, crumbs of bread/matzah/cookies bound together by fat and the like, which do not have the status of bread at all (siman 168, se’if 10) [however, bread crumbs with no additional mixture at all have the blessing Hamotzi].
[4] Mezonot foods that certainly come for pleasure [such as Klik, whose blessing is Mezonot, and likewise an ice-cream cone].
[5] Mezonot foods made from a thin batter [such as wafers].
Accordingly, on most foods one should not recite Mezonot within the meal, except for the following foods: Kabukim, Kariot [when eating them for pleasure and not for satiation; see the source], Bisli deep-fried in oil [as is common in Israel], chocolate balls or cheese balls mixed with crushed cookies, ice cream or chocolate with noticeable cookie pieces, Klik [whose blessing is Mezonot], an ice-cream cone, and wafers.
Source: It is explained in Shulchan Aruch (se’if 6) that one recites Mezonot on pat haba’ah bekisnin within a meal because it is not exempted by the blessing of Hamotzi on the bread [unlike the view of the Rashba, who holds that one does not recite a blessing on pat haba’ah bekisnin within the meal]; see Chazon Ish (siman 27, s.k. 2).

The blessing on cakes within the meal

According to what was explained above, all three conditions must be present in order to consider the food pat haba’ah bekisnin. It follows that almost all cakes common in our times are a doubtful bread, since the three conditions are not present in them [for they are not crunchy]. Therefore one should not recite Mezonot on the cakes common in our times within a meal; however, ideally one should have intention to exempt them with the blessing of Hamotzi (Biur Halacha there, se’if 8, s.v. te’unim). They may also be exempted by means of foods in which all three conditions are present and upon which one recites Mezonot within the meal.

Kabukim

On Kabukim one recites Mezonot within the meal, since all three conditions are present: they are kneaded with fruit juice, filled, and crunchy. There is also room to discuss that they are considered to lack “the status of bread” [“turita denahama”].

Kariot

On Kariot one recites Mezonot within the meal, since all three conditions are present. However, here one must distinguish between eating them for pleasure, in which case one recites the blessing as above, and eating them for satiation, in which case even though they are certainly pat haba’ah bekisnin, one does not recite Mezonot on them (see Mishnah Berurah there, s.k. 41; Biur Halacha, se’if 13, s.v. veyerei).
However, there is room to consider that since they do not have the status of bread, even if one eats them for satiation one should recite a blessing. This requires analysis: whether indeed they lack the status of bread, and also perhaps they are considered items that come because of the meal, since they are also intended for satiation.

Bisli

Bisli that is deep-fried in oil and is less than a kezayit has the blessing Mezonot, since it certainly is not in the status of bread (as explained in siman 168, se’if 13) [and the Rishonim disagree regarding its law when each piece contains a kezayit].
It appears that even if one eats Bisli for satiation, one should recite Mezonot on it within the meal, since it has no status of bread at all; it is like fruit, on which one recites a blessing within a meal even if eating it for satiation (see siman 177).

Soup nuts and croutons

Soup nuts or croutons, although they are deep-fried in oil and are less than a kezayit, since they come for satiation, their law is like items that come because of the meal (siman 177), and therefore one should not recite Mezonot on them within the meal.

Chocolate balls

Chocolate balls that contain cookies mixed in have the blessing Mezonot (like the law of chavitza in siman 168, se’if 10), and since they do not have the status of bread, one recites a blessing on them within the meal. It appears that even if one eats them for satiation, one recites a blessing on them.

Klik / ice-cream cone

Klik [cookies coated in chocolate] — it appears that since it is certainly an item that comes for pleasure, one recites a blessing on it within the meal. For the entire reason one does not recite a blessing on cakes within the meal is because they may have the law of bread that comes for satiation [since the three conditions are not present in them]. But Klik, ice-cream cones, and the like, since they certainly come for pleasure, one recites a blessing on them within the meal.

Wafers

Wafers — their law is like terita (Berachot 37b; siman 168, se’if 15), for there is no concept of establishing a meal with them because they are thin, and one can eat them without limit. Since they do not have the status of bread, one recites a blessing on them within the meal when they are served as dessert (and when one eats them for satiation, this requires analysis, according to what is explained in Mishnah Berurah, siman 168, s.k. 90).

Waffles

One does not recite a blessing on waffles within the meal. Although there was room to say that one should bless on them because they contain the three conditions [filled, kneaded, and crunchy], in practice it appears that the condition of being filled is not met, because a filling added after baking is not considered a filling, since the status of bread already applied to it at the time of baking [Shulchan Aruch HaRav (siman 168, se’if 9). And although one could say that since it is intended to be filled, even if the filling is added after baking it is considered filled, in practice it appears that one should not distinguish]. Therefore one should not recite a blessing on this within the meal.

Although there was room to say that one should bless on them under the law of terita [and like the wafers above], it appears that since they have several layers, they do not have the law of terita.