Making Kiddush Over Bread and Crackers

Translated and adapted by Rav Eliezer Kwass

KIDDUSH OVER BREAD

          The gemara (Pesachim 106b) cites the following anecdote:

"Rav Yitzchak son of Shmuel son of Marta said to them, 'Many times I stood before Rav... When bread was dear to him ("chaviva lei") he recited kiddush over bread; when wine was dear to him, he recited kiddush over wine."

          According to the Rashbam (s.v. "De-chaviva Lei Rifta"), this anecdote teaches us that one can recite kiddush over bread (though havdala may only be made over wine).  The Rambam, Rosh, and others also rule that bread is a valid substitute in the absence of wine.  On the other hand, Rabbeinu Tam (quoted in Tosafot rules that one may not recite kiddush over bread.  He understands the gemara to mean not that Rav made kiddush only over bread, excluding wine, but rather that he ate bread before wine.  When Rav fancied bread, he washed first, made Ha-motzi over bread, and then recited kiddush over wine.  The Shulchan Arukh (OC 272:9) quotes the Rishonim and apparently rules that one may make kiddush over bread alone; the Rama concurs, and this is the accepted halakha.

          In order to clarify whether one may recite kiddush over crackers, we must deal with two questions:

1. Does kiddush over bread ("pat") include "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" (cakes, crunchy bread or filled bread - see below for a discussion of the definition)?

2. Are crackers defined as "pat ha-ba be-kisanin?"

1. KIDDUSH OVER PAT HA-BA BE-KISANIN

          Whether one may recite kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" depends on how one understands the halakha regarding reciting kiddush over bread.  If the reason one may recite kiddush over bread is because bread is considered as important as wine, then it would be difficult to include "pat ha-ba be-kisanin."  It is certainly less important than regular bread; perhaps, then, the extension of kiddush to bread does not extend to "pat ha-ba be-kisanin."  However, if the reason one may recite kiddush over bread stems from bread's importance to the meal, not the intrinsic importance of bread itself, it may be possible to include "pat ha-ba be-kisanin."  Kiddush is tied to the meal; "Kiddush must be made  in the place where the meal occurs."  If one can speak of centering a meal ("kevi'ut se'uda") around "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" the way one can speak of centering a meal around bread, perhaps one can make kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" as well.

          The Rishonim seem to lean toward the second possibility, permitting kiddush over bread because of bread's centrality to the meal.

- The Meiri explains the difference between kiddush and havdala based on this idea:

"Whatever the case, one cannot recite havdala over bread at all.  It makes sense to limit this rule to kiddush, because kiddush was instituted to be recited in conjunction with a meal.  Havdala was instituted to be recited over wine."

- The Rosh (Pesachim 10:17) also seems to base himself on this explanation:

"It is fitting to recite kiddush over bread, because having a meal is one of the obligations of Shabbat."

          According to the Meiri, it appears that the main reason one may recite kiddush over bread is because there is an essential link between kiddush and the meal; the basic purpose of kiddush is to enhance the Shabbat meal, therefore bread may be used.  The Rosh, in contrast, implies that it is not the link between kiddush and the meal that is behind the ability to recite kiddush over bread.  Rather, the Sages allowed bread to be used for kiddush in the absence of wine in order to enable one to fulfill the mitzva of having a proper meal on Shabbat.  Both of them agree, however, that it is not the importance of bread that enables one to recite kiddush over it.  Bread's importance lies in its being the food that forms the core of the meal.  The Meiri states that kiddush is made over a meal, and bread is central to a meal; the Rosh states that kiddush was permitted over bread in order to enable one to eat the meal. 

          Although the Shulchan Arukh does not relate to the question of whether one can recite kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin," the Acharonim deal with this issue (see Yabia Omer 3:19 where part of the discussion is quoted).  The consensus is apparently that one may recite kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" that is at the center of a meal (this is also the conclusion in Shmirat Shabbat Ke-hilkhata).

WHAT DEFINES A MEAL?

          Before dealing with the status of crackers, let us raise another question: What type of "meal" is required so that kiddush is considered made "in conjunction with a meal?"  In other words, in order to permit kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" what must be eaten?  The Tur and Shulchan Arukh (OC 273) quote the Geonim who rule that one does not have to eat a complete meal; even if "one ate a little bit ...," at least a "ke-zayit" (the size of an olive) of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin," or drank a "revi'it" (quarter "lug" - 86 [old Yerushalmi custom and custom of Eidot Ha-mizrach], 137 [custom in the Diaspora], or 150 [Chazon Ish] cl. see Shemirat Shabbat Ke-hilkhata vol. 2, 47:9) of wine that is sufficient.

          [All this applies to the fulfillment of requirement of kiddush, deeming it "kiddush over a meal."  However, one can only fulfill the mitzva of eating three meals on Shabbat through actual bread (Shulchan Arukh 274:4).]

           Whether one can recite kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" that is part of a meal may depend on the different understandings of the Rosh and the Meiri (quoted above) regarding why one may make kiddush over bread.  If, as the Meiri believes, the main aspect of kiddush is the meal, (and therefore one can use bread, not only wine), any type of bread that fulfills the rules of kiddush connected to a meal is sufficient.  Even "pat ha-ba be-kisanin," which, according to the Geonim, is considered enough of a meal over which to recite kiddush, can be considered "bread" and one does not need wine over which to recite kiddush.

          If, however, as according to the opinion of the Rosh, the Sages permitted reciting kiddush over bread because there is a mitzva to eat a meal on Shabbat, "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" would not be sufficient.  One would only be able to recite kiddush over bread with which one can fulfill the mitzva of the Shabbat meals.

          We might add the following possibility: only if one actually made a meal out of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" to the degree that it would be considered "bread" requiring the blessing of Ha-motzi beforehand and Birkat Ha-mazon afterwards, would it be considered "bread" for kiddush.  Based on this theory, it would seem that, out of doubt, one should avoid making kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" unless he made it the center of the meal.  [The Shmirat Shabbat Ke-hilkhata vol. 2, 53:18, rules that one may make kiddush over "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" that only requires "Mezonot;" we do not find a clear source for his ruling, however.]

2. CRACKERS: "PAT HA-BA BE-KISANIN?"

          Until now we dealt with "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" whose blessing is dependent on how it is eaten (eaten alone - "Mezonot;" eaten as the center of a meal - "Ha-motzi").  What, however, is the rule regarding crackers?  We will address this question in short, as we did the previous issues.

          The Beit Yosef (OC 168) quotes three opinions of the Rishonim as to the definition of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin."  He rules inclusive of all three opinions.  One of the three, that of Rav Hai, is quoted by the Arukh, "bread made into hard, dry, crunchy cakes."  Crackers seem to fall under this definition.  They may, however, be closer to another precedent case, quoted by the Taz (OC 168:9) and the Magen Avraham (OC 168:40) in the name of the Shela:

"However, those that are baked in an iron mold, even though they are placed in a mold called "unpaltkis" in Prague; since they are very thin wafers, after baking one only makes the blessing "Mezonot" even if it was eaten as the center of a meal."

          One recites "Ha-motzi" over normal "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" if it is eaten as the center of a meal; but if it is baked into thin wafers it can no longer be considered "bread" (and one never makes Ha-motzi or Birkat Ha-mazon over it), regardless of how it is eaten.  It is no different than foods cooked (boiled) from the five grains.  Crackers are very thin and may be compared to that to which the Shela refers.

          We have concluded until this point that under normal circumstances, even when put at the center of the meal, crackers can not take on the halakhic qualities of bread.  However, there may exist special circumstances that would allow kiddush to be made over CERTAIN crackers.

          It seems to me that a different analogy is appropriate, - matza.  Despite the fact that matza fits the description of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" well - it is dry and crispy, - we make Ha-motzi on matza (at least during Pesach.  We will not enter into the dispute regarding whether one makes Ha-motzi over matza after Pesach).  Since on Pesach we have no "better" bread than matza, it takes on the status of bread completely, without having to be considered the center of the meal.  Ha-motzi is recited over any bit of matza.  We see, then, that "Pat ha-ba be-kisanin"'s status as bread is not only determined by how it is eaten in a particular context (center of a meal or snack); but it can also rise to the status of bread through its general use (on Pesach it is the staple food and therefore considered equal to bread).

          A mishna in Berakhot (44a) may be a source for this concept.  The mishna quotes a dispute between Tannaim about whether to recite Birkat Ha-mazon over bread or over a meal.  According to Rabbi Akiva, if one made a meal out of a cooked vegetable he should recite Birkat Ha-mazon.  The Sages argue that one can only recite Birkat Ha-mazon over bread.  Rishonim explain that the sages agree that the Birkat Ha-mazon is recited after a MEAL, but that since most people's meal centers around bread, Birkat Ha-mazon is only made over bread.  Birkat Ha-mazon is based on the majority's eating habits; one individual is making a meal out of a cooked vegetable is not considered significant (we apply the halakhic principle "Batla da'ato eitzel kol adam" - The halakha considers an individual's particular behavior insignificant when it differs from most people's.).

          This reasoning, that making a meal out of something other than bread is considered irregular and therefore halakhically irrelevant ("batla da'ato"), only applies when bread is available.  Anyone in a position where there is no bread to be found would make something else into his central food.  In this case, the Sages would agree with Rabbi Akiva that if one made a meal out of cooked vegetables not because of some eccentricity, but rather because it was the only food available, one should recite Birkat Ha-mazon.  Since anyone in this position would do the same, the principle "batla da'ato ..." is no longer applicable.

          There is a precedent for disregarding "batla da'ato..." in situations where anyone in the same situation would act similarly.  On Shabbat it is forbidden to squeeze the juice of fruit that people normally use for juice (e.g. grapes).  Based on the principle of "batla da'ato eitzel kol adam," using fruit for juice in an abnormal manner should not fall under the category of forbidden squeezing of juice.  However, according to the Magen Avraham, fruit that is not normally used for juice in a certain area because it is not common in that area, but would be used if it was more easily attainable, is also forbidden to squeeze.  Here, the rule of "batla da'ato" does not apply.

          The Bi'ur Halakha (OC 168) also does not apply "batla da'ato" to a person in a unique situation.  He writes that sick or aged people that normally make a meal over less "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" than average people are obligated to make Birkat Ha-mazon over a smaller amount.

          In today's market, some crackers are sold to be used for a dip or as a snack; others are marketed as an alternative to bread, such as the Israeli "lachmit."  It follows from this that when there is no other bread available, crackers of this lachmit type achieve the status of bread.  In such a situation, lachmit eaten with a meal is halakhically considered a set meal ("kevi'at se'uda") requiring Ha-motzi and Birkat Ha-mazon.  One may also recite kiddush over such a meal.

          Even under such special circumstances, one only recites kiddush over lachmit if he makes it into a set meal.  This involves eating at least a "ke-zayit bikhdei akhilat pras," an olive's size of food in the time it takes to eat a pras (about eight olive's worth).  Even if one eats other food at the meal, if one does not eat this much lachmit it is not considered a set meal.

          Acharonim argue, however, about two issues with regard to making a meal out of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin:"

1. What quantity of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" must be eaten to be considered a meal?

2. Must this quantity be composed totally of "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" or do other foods combine to make up the proper amount?

          It seems that, based on the analogy to matza on Pesach, one recites Ha-motzi over any quantity of lachmit (when no other bread is available) but must eat a ke-zayit in order to require Birkat Ha-mazon.  Also based on the matza-lachmit analogy, all opinions about the second question would agree that lachmit should be treated like bread itself.  Further clarification is needed to come to any conclusive decisions about this issue.

CONCLUSION

          One whose meal is centered around lachmit, in the absence of other bread and wine, can make kiddush over the lachmit on Shabbat evening.  On Shabbat day, kiddush should be made over another drink that is considered a "chamar medina," (a drink that has a parallel status to wine in a particular society [e.g. beer]).  When lachmit is the most "bread-like" food around, it is unclear what blessing one ought to recite over it when eaten by itself as a snack, therefore it should be eaten only in the context of a meal.  A ke-zayit should be eaten alone initially, at a normal rate of consumption, Ha-motzi should be recited beforehand and Birkat Ha-mazon afterwards.  When even "pat ha-ba be-kisanin" is not available, one should even make kiddush over chamar medina at night as opposed to not reciting kiddush at all.

(Daf Kesher #196, Elul 5749, vol. 2, pp. 322-324.)