If a person eats cereal with milk, which Beracha – or Berachot – does he recite? If, for example, the Beracha over the cereal itself is Mezonot, as is often the case, does the person recite only Mezonot, only She'hakol (the Beracha over milk), or both? The Gemara in Berachot establishes that when a person eats two foods together, he recites a Beracha over only the primary food, and this Beracha covers the secondary food, as well. Even though the secondary food independently would require a different Beracha, when it is subordinate to a primary food the Beracha over the primary food covers this secondary food, as well. Our question thus becomes, do we consider the milk subordinate to the cereal, or is the cereal deemed subordinate to the milk? Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986) addresses this question in his work Iggerot Moshe (2:43), and he concludes that the milk is to be viewed as subordinate to the cereal. Since the milk serves to soften the cereal and make it easier to chew and swallow, as well as to enhance the cereal's taste, it clearly plays a secondary role. Therefore, one who eats a grain cereal with milk recites only the Beracha of Mezonot, which covers both the cereal and the milk. Rabbi Feinstein adds that even if some milk remains after one has eaten all the cereal, and he now wishes to drink the remaining milk, he does not recite She'hakol over the milk. Since the milk had been together with, and subordinate to, the cereal, it was covered by the Beracha recited over the cereal, and therefore it does not require its own Beracha. Similarly, if a person eats apple pie, he recites only the Beracha of Mezonot, which covers both the crust – the primary component of the pie – and the apples. And even if one completes the crust and now eats only apple, he does not recite a Beracha over the apple, because it had been covered by the Beracha of Mezonot recited initially over the crust. Rabbi Feinstein notes one exception to his ruling concerning the Beracha recited over cereal and milk. If a person adds a significant amount of milk to his cereal for medical purposes, such as to increase his daily calcium intake, then the milk now serves a function other than simply enhancing the texture or taste of the cereal, and as such, it requires a separate Beracha. In such a case, therefore, one would recite Mezonot over the cereal and She'hakol over the milk. If a parent adds milk to a child's cereal for health purposes, but the child perceives the milk simply as enhancing the cereal, without any interest in the health benefits, then the child would not recite She'hakol over the milk, since from his perspective the milk is added to enhance the cereal's taste, and not for any intrinsic purpose. If a person adds bananas, raisins, or other fruits to his cereal and milk, does he recite a separate Beracha over the fruit, or does the Mezonot recited over the cereal cover the fruit, as well? Once again, we follow the principle that the Beracha recited over the primary food covers all other foods partaken of together with that food. In this case, then, since the fruit is subordinate to the cereal, the Mezonot recited over the cereal covers even the fruit. It should be noted, however, that if a person decided to add the fruit only after he recited the Beracha of Mezonot, then he must recite a separate Beracha over the fruit. Since he did not intend when he recited Mezonot that this Beracha should apply to the fruit, when he adds the fruit he must recite a separate Beracha. However, if a person regularly adds fruit to his cereal and milk, then we assume that he had the fruit in mind when he recited the Mezonot, and thus even if he added the fruit only after reciting Mezonot he need not recite a separate Beracha over the fruit. Summary: One who eats cereal with milk recites a Beracha over the cereal, and this Beracha covers the milk, as well, including leftover milk that one drinks after finishing the cereal. An exception is a person who adds milk for strictly health purposes, who must recite a separate Beracha of She'hakol over the milk after reciting the Beracha over the cereal. The Beracha recited over cereal also covers fruits that one adds to his cereal, assuming he had those fruits in mind when he recited the Beracha. If one added the fruit only after reciting the Beracha and he does not ordinarily add fruit, then he must recite a separate Beracha over the fruit.

The Shulhan Aruch establishes a fundamental rule concerning the Beracha to be recited on products made from fruit: if a fruit is crushed into a paste, then it still retains its status with regard to Berachot. The case under discussion is dates which were mashed into a paste and eaten in that paste form. The Shulhan Aruch ruled that as long as the fruit was not pureed into a liquid, the product is still considered the original fruit, and the Beracha over this product is "Boreh Peri Ha'etz." This Halacha has numerous practical applications for common food products. Kellogg's cornflakes, for example, is produced by mashing corn, and, as such, the Beracha over Kellogg's cornflakes is the same as the Beracha over ordinary corn – "Boreh Peri Ha'adama." Some other companies produce cornflakes by first grinding corn into a flour, in which case the product loses its status as corn, and the Beracha is therefore "She'ha'kol." Another example is jelly produced from real fruit (as opposed to jelly produced from artificial ingredients). The jelly is, essentially, fruit which has been mashed, and so the Beracha over such a product is "Boreh Peri Ha'etz." (It must be emphasized that this applies only if the jelly is made from real fruit, and not from artificial ingredients.) This applies as well to apple sauce, which is, essentially, crushed apple. Likewise, the Beracha over mashed potatoes would be "Boreh Peri Ha'adama," just like over ordinary potatoes. Although Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998) maintained that one recites "She'ha'kol" over mashed potatoes, Hacham Ovadia Yosef and most other Poskim ruled that for Sepharadim, the proper Beracha to recite is "Boreh Peri Ha'adama." This applies also to peanut butter, which is simply mashed peanuts, such that one who eats peanut butter by itself recites "Ha'adama." By the same token, one who eats humus by itself recites "Boreh Peri Ha'adama," because humus is simply crushed chickpeas. Falafel balls, however, which are also made from mashed chickpeas, mark an exception to this rule. Hacham Ovadia ruled that since additional ingredients are added to the mashed chickpeas to produce the falafel ball, and it does not taste or look like chickpeas, the final product does not have the status of the original chickpeas, and thus the Beracha is "She'ha'kol." Hacham Ovadia originally ruled that one recites "Ha'adama" over falafel balls, but he later retracted this ruling and determined that the proper Beracha is "She'ha'kol." Another exception to this rule is amardeen – a product made by pounding apricots into a leather. This product appears to be no different than mashed dates, such that the Beracha should be "Ha'etz," and this is, indeed, the view of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909). However, Rav Yosef Yedid Halevi (Aleppo-Jerusalem, 1867-1930), in his work Birkat Yosef, maintained that since amardeen is given a different name, and it does not look like apricots at all, it is considered a different food, and its Beracha is "She'ha'kol." This is the view accepted by Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Popcorn is corn which was heated, and so the Beracha is "Ha'adama," especially since popcorn is made from a special kernel grown for this purpose. A popular Israeli snack called "bamba" is made from puffed corn covered with peanut butter. Hacham Ovadia ruled that for Sepharadim, the proper Beracha over bamba is "Ha'adama." Tehina is made by grinding sesame seeds, however, as Hacham Ovadia noted, it is more of a liquid than a solid, and therefore, it loses its status as sesame, and the appropriate Beracha is "She'hakol." Summary: As a rule, mashed fruits or grains retain their original status vis-à-vis the Beracha requirement. Therefore, the Beracha over apple sauce or jelly made from real fruit is "Ha'etz," and the Beracha over mashed potatoes, humus, peanut butter, "bamba" and Kellogg's cornflakes (which, unlike some other brands of cornflakes, is made by mashing corn, and not from corn flour) is "Ha'adama." Exceptions to this rule include armadeen, falafel balls and tehina, over which one recites "She'ha'kol." Popcorn is considered regular corn, and thus requires the Beracha of "Ha'adama."

The accepted custom is to recite the Beracha of "She'ha'kol" over coffee, and this is, of course, the Halacha. Interestingly, however, there is considerable discussion among the Poskim as to why this should be the case. The Rosh (Rabbenu Asher Ben Yehiel, 1250-1327) was of the opinion that if a fruit is boiled, the Beracha over the liquid is "Ha'etz," like the fruit itself. Seemingly, this should apply to coffee, which is produced by boiling coffee beans that grow on trees. And even the Rashba (Rav Shlomo Ben Aderet of Barcelona, 1235-1310), who disputes the Rosh's ruling, concedes that if this is the primary use of the fruit – to boil it and drink the liquid – then the Beracha over the liquid is "Ha'etz." Clearly, the primary method of consuming coffee beans is by producing coffee, and so even according to the Rashba, there is reason to believe that the Beracha over coffee should be "Ha'etz." As mentioned, common practice is to recite "She'ha'kol" over coffee, but the Poskim establish that the possibility of the proper Beracha being "Ha'etz" has certain implications. Namely, if a person mistakenly recited "Boreh Peri Ha'etz" over a cup of coffee, he has fulfilled his obligation, and does not then recite "She'ha'kol." Hacham Ovadia Yosef added that this is true also if one mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over coffee. He brought a view that a tree which produces fruit already within its first year does not have the Halachic status of a "tree" with respect to Berachot, and thus the Beracha over its fruit is "Ha'adama," and not "Ha'etz." The coffee bean tree produces the beans within its first year, and so there is room to argue that the Beracha over coffee is "Ha'adama." Therefore, if one recited "Ha'adama" over a cup of coffee, he has fulfilled his obligation and does not then recite "She'ha'kol." Another practical application of this discussion is a case of one who eats a fruit together with coffee, as often happens at dessert. If one recites "Ha'etz" over the fruit before drinking the coffee, then the coffee might be covered by this Beracha, and, as such, one would not then recite "She'ha'kol" over the coffee, given the uncertainty as to whether it still requires a Beracha. Therefore, Hacham Ovadia Yosef advised that if one eats a fruit with coffee, he should have specific intention while reciting the Beracha over the fruit that the Beracha should not cover the coffee. If he does not have this intention, then he does not then recite a Beracha over the coffee, as the coffee might have been covered by the Beracha recited over the fruit. This discussion demonstrates that when it comes to Berachot, we must be aware not only of which Beracha should be recited over a given food item, but also which Berachot would cover the food after the fact if they are recited, as this, too, is a significant factor in regard to the Halachot of Berachot. Summary: Although it is accepted to recite "She'ha'kol" over coffee, it could be argued that the proper Beracha is "Ha'etz." Therefore, if one mistakenly recited "Ha'etz" over coffee, he does not then recite "She'ha'kol." And, if one is eating a fruit with his coffee, he should have specific intention that the Beracha recited over the fruit does not cover the coffee, and if he does not have this intention, he does not then recite a Beracha over the coffee.

There are certain fruits that grow on trees with unusual features, giving rise to the question of whether the Beracha over these fruits is "Ha'etz" – like for other fruits – or "Ha'adama." These fruits include papaya, banana, pineapple and passion fruit. As for papaya, Hacham Ovadia Yosef ruled (in Hazon Ovadia – Berachot, p. 23) that since the papaya tree produces fruit within the first year after it is planted, it does not qualify as a Halachic "tree." This is based on the Tosefta's ruling that a defining characteristic of trees, as defined by Halacha, is that they produce fruit in a slow, gradual process. As such, the Beracha over papaya is "Ha'adama." Nevertheless, given the different opinions that exist, the halachic status of papayas, as well as that of bananas, pineapples and passion fruit, remains uncertain. We recite "Ha'adama" over these fruits, since "Ha'adama" suffices after the fact even for fruits that optimally require "Ha'etz," but the possibility that these fruits require "Ha'etz" has certain important ramifications. One example would be a fruit plate at a Kiddush on Shabbat that consists of grapes, melon and pineapple. Grapes certainly require "Ha'etz," melon certainly requires "Ha'adama," and the status of pineapple, as mentioned, is uncertain. If one wishes to partake of all three, he should first recite the Beracha of "Ha'etz" over the grape, followed by "Ha'adama" over the melon. The pineapple is then covered according to all views, since both Berachot have been recited. As the status of pineapple is uncertain, it is preferable to recite the Berachot over the other fruits in order to avoid a situation of Halachic doubt. Another example is where one eats dates and pineapple. The individual in this case can either first recite "Ha'adama" over the pineapple, and then recite "Ha'etz" over the dates, or, if he prefers eating the date first, he can recite "Ha'etz" over the date with specific intention that this Beracha does not cover the pineapple. After eating, he should first recite "Boreh Nefashot" over the pineapple, followed by "Al Ha'etz" over the dates. If he would first recite "Al Ha'etz," this Beracha would cover the pineapple, and so he should recite "Boreh Nefashot" before "Al Ha'etz." Summary: The halachic status of papayas, bananas, pineapple and passion fruit with respect to Berachot is uncertain, and so, in order to cover both possibilities, we recite "Ha'adama" over these fruits. If one eats one of these fruits – such as a pineapple – together with a fruit that requires "Ha'etz," one should either first recite "Ha'adama" over the pineapple, or first recite "Ha'etz" over the other fruit with specific intention that this Beracha should not cover the pineapple. If the other fruit is one which requires the recitation of "Al Ha'etz" after eating, one should first recite "Boreh Nefashot" over the pineapple and then "A Ha'etz" over the other fruit.

Different opinions exist as to the Beracha recited over Labas – almonds with a thick coating of sugar. The Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) writes (204) that one recites "Ha'etz," just like over ordinary almonds, because the almond is the primary component and the sugar is secondary. The Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), by contrast, felt that neither the almond nor the sugar can be regarded as primary or secondary, and therefore a separate Beracha must be recited over each. He ruled that one should first scrape off some sugar and recite "She'hakol" over the sugar, followed by "Ha'etz" over the almond. This view is brought by Rav Yisrael Bitan in Yalkut Yosef. A third view is that of Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998), who maintained that given the uncertainty surrounding the Beracha over Labas, one should simply recite "She'ha'kol." This was the practice followed in Baghdad, despite the ruling of its Rabbi, the Ben Ish Hai. All three views are valid, and therefore one can either recite "Ha'etz," recite "She'ha'kol," or recite separate Berachot over the sugar and over the almond. Summary: Three views exist as to the Beracha over Labas – almonds with a thick coating of sugar – and all three are valid: 1) "Ha'etz"; 2) "She'ha'kol"; 3) "She'hakol" over some of the sufgar sugar, followed by "Ha'etz" over the almond.

The Beracha recited over a chocolate bar that contains nuts is "She'ha'kol." The chocolate is clearly the primary component, while the nuts are secondary, and therefore one should recite "She'ha'kol" over the chocolate, and this Beracha covers the nuts. If one eats nuts with a thin glaze of honey, the Beracha is "Ha'etz." Although Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998) was uncertain about which Beracha to recite, the consensus among the Poskim is that the thin glaze is subordinate to the nut, and therefore the Beracha of "Ha'etz" covers the glaze. However, if one eats peanuts that are coated with dough, then the Beracha is "Mezonot." There is a fundamental rule that if a food product contains flour, then even if the flour constitutes a small minority of the food, nevertheless, it is considered the primary ingredient and the Beracha is "Mezonot," unless the flour is added only to keep the ingredients together. As long as the flour is added for purposes of satiation, and not just for the consistency, it is considered the primary ingredient. Therefore, the Beracha over peanuts with a coating of dough is "Mezonot." Summary: The Beracha over a chocolate bar with nuts is "She'ha'kol." The Beracha over nuts that have a thin honey glaze is "Ha'etz." The Beracha over a nut covered with dough is "Mezonot."

The Shulhan Aruch rules (Orah Haim 206) that if a person recited the Beracha of "Boreh Peri Ha'etz" over a food that requires the Beracha of "Boreh Peri Ha'adama," he has not fulfilled his obligation, and he must then recite "Ha'adama." Something that grows directly from the ground – such as lettuce or other vegetables – cannot be said to have grown on an Etz ("tree"), and thus even after the fact, the recitation of "Ha'etz" does not fulfill the obligation, and the correct Beracha must be recited. In the reverse case, if one recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit which requires "Ha'etz," he has fulfilled his obligation Be'di'abad (after the fact). Since fruits grow on trees which grow from the ground, the Beracha of "Ha'adama" is appropriate for fruits, even though of course one is supposed to recite "Ha'etz" over fruits. Therefore, after the fact, one has fulfilled his obligation if he recited "Ha'adama" over a product requiring "Ha'etz." It is unclear whether a person who recited "Ha'adama" in such a case and then immediately realized his mistake should correct himself, or just eat the fruit. Some contend that since the Beracha of "Ha'adama" suffices after the fact, there is no need for the person in this case to correct himself. Others, however, argue that the person should correct himself in order to recite the Beracha that is supposed to be recited. This question has not been definitively resolved one way or the other. In a case where one mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit, the Beracha covers all foods on the table that require "Ha'adama." Thus, for example, if a person recited "Ha'adama" over an apple, and there are vegetables on the table, then he does not have to recite "Ha'adama" a second time over the vegetables. Although his Beracha of "Ha'adama" was recited by mistake, nevertheless, it covers all the vegetables in front of him. This applies also to one who mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" over a food requiring a different Beracha. The Beracha of "She'ha'kol," after the fact, covers all foods. And so if one mistakenly recited "She'ha'kol" over a fruit, for example, his Beracha covers the fruit as well as any other foods in front of him, such as water. This is mentioned by Yalkut Yosef, citing his father, Hacham Ovadia Yosef. Finally, the Radbaz (Rav David Ben Zimra, Egypt, 1479-1573) ruled that if one mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a fruit, and other people at the table listened to his Beracha with the intention of fulfilling their obligation, they fulfill their obligation even though the Beracha was recited mistakenly. This can happen on the night of Rosh Hashanah, when the head of the household customarily recites "Ha'etz" over an apple or date for everyone at the table, who fulfill their obligation by listening to his Beracha. If he mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over the fruit, both he and they have fulfilled the obligation. This is the Radbaz's ruling, and it was accepted by later Poskim. Summary: One who mistakenly recited "Ha'etz" over a food requiring "Ha'adama" has not fulfilled his obligation, and must then recite "Ha'adama." However, if a person mistakenly recited "Ha'adama" over a food requiring "Ha'etz," he has fulfilled his obligation. (If he realized his mistake immediately after reciting "Ha'adama," it is uncertain whether he should correct himself.) This recitation of "Ha'adama" covers all foods on the table requiring "Ha'adama," and if others intended to fulfill their obligation by listening to this Beracha, they, too, fulfill their requirement, even though the Beracha was not the proper Beracha.

The Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 206:2) rules that if one mistakenly recited the Beracha of "Ha'adama" over a fruit that requires the Beracha of "Ha'etz," he has fulfilled his obligation. Thus, for example, if a person recited "Ha'adama" over an apple, he has fulfilled his obligation and does not then need to recite "Ha'etz," because after the fact, the recitation of "Ha'adama" suffices for a fruit requiring "Ha'etz." The Shulhan Aruch then proceeds to rule that because of this Halacha, if a person eats an item over which he is uncertain whether to recite "Ha'etz" or "Ha'adama," he should recite "Ha'adama," since this Beracha covers both kinds of foods. This situation can arise regarding those fruits whose Halachic status vis-à-vis Berachot is uncertain, as the tree's properties are atypical, or in a case where a person simply does not know the status of the fruit he eats, and is unable to determine which Beracha to recite. In such a case, the Shulhan Aruch writes, the individual should recite "Ha'adama," since this Beracha suffices even for fruits requiring "Ha'etz." Although the Shulhan Aruch's ruling is straightforward, a number of later Poskim ruled differently on this subject. Hacham Bension Abba Shaul (Israel, 1924-1998), in his work Or Le'sion (2:46), writes that in such a case, one should recite the generic Beracha of "She'ha'kol," instead of "Ha'adama." He notes that the Bet Yosef (commentary to the Tur by Maran, author of the Shulhan Aruch) famously brings a version of the text of the Rambam's ruling, according to which one does not fulfill his obligation if he recites "Ha'adama" over a fruit requiring "Ha'etz." In light of this position, it is preferable in a situation of uncertainty to recite the generic Beracha of "She'ha'kol," which covers all foods, rather than recite "Ha'adama," which would not satisfy the requirement for the fruit being eaten according to the view of the Rambam. This was also the view of the Ben Ish Hai (Rav Yosef Haim of Baghdad, 1833-1909), in his work Rab Pe'alim, and of Rav Haim Ben-Attar (1696-1743), in his work Rishon Le'sion. Likewise, Rav Yosef Mesas (1892-1974) ruled that one who eats a banana should recite "She'ha'kol," and not "Ha'adama." Although the Shulhan Aruch ruled that one recites "Ha'adama" over bananas, Rav Mesas claimed that the Shulhan Aruch here followed his position that one recites "Ha'adama" over a fruit whose status is in question, as the status of a banana is uncertain due to the fact that the banana tree is unusual (in that it collapses each year). In light of the Rambam's position mentioned earlier, Rav Mesas noted, it would be preferable to recite "She'ha'kol" over bananas, in order to satisfy all opinions. Hacham Ovadia Yosef cites Rav Mesas' ruling in his Yehaveh Da'at (6:13, in a footnote), and disagrees, noting the widespread, accepted practice to recite "Ha'adama" over bananas. The majority of Halachic authorities, Hacham Ovadia noted, disputed the Rambam's ruling regarding the recitation of "Ha'adama" over a fruit requiring "Ha'etz," and, there are editions of the Rambam's work according to which he concurs with the majority opinion. Hacham Ovadia thus concluded that we should follow the Shulhan Aruch's ruling, and recite "Ha'adama" – not "She'ha'kol" – in situations where there is a question whether a food requires "Ha'adama" or "Ha'etz." Summary: In situations where one is uncertain whether a fruit requires "Ha'etz" or "Ha'adama," one should recite "Ha'adama." This applies both when a person does not know the correct Beracha and does not have access to this information, and when a fruit grows on a tree with unusual properties – such as a banana – such that its status is uncertain. In both cases, one recites "Ha'adama."

In an earlier edition of Daily Halacha, it was noted that if a person places small pieces of bread (less than a Ke'zayit) into a pot of hot soup, the bread is "downgraded" from the Beracha of "Ha'mosi" to the Beracha of "Mezonot." This Halacha is codified by the Shulhan Aruch (Orah Haim 168). The Halachic authorities debate the question of whether this would also apply if one poured soup from its original pot onto small pieces of bread. The question is whether "Irui Keli Rishon" – pouring hot liquid from its original pot onto food – has the effect of Halachically "cooking" the food. If it is considered cooking, then this case is no different from the case of placing small pieces of bread into the original pot, and one would recite "Mezonot" over the bread. If, however, "Irui" is not considered capable of Halachic "cooking," then the pieces of bread in this case are not considered to have undergone cooking, and they retain their status of "Ha'mosi." In light of this difference of opinion, the Mishna Berura (Rav Yisrael Meir Kagan of Radin, 1839-1933) rules (168:52) that if one eats small pieces of bread upon which hot liquid had been poured from its original pot, he must first wash and recite "Ha'mosi" over proper bread. Otherwise, he puts himself into a situation of uncertainty, as it is unclear whether the proper Beracha over these pieces of bread is "Mezonot" or "Ha'mosi." This is the ruling codified in Yalkut Yosef – Berachot (p. 306; listen to audio recording for precise citation). Summary: If hot liquid was poured from its original pot onto small pieces of bread (less than a Ke'zayit), it is unclear whether they require "Mezonot" or "Ha'mosi," and therefore one should not eat them unless he first recites "Ha'mosi" over ordinary bread.

If a person eats chicken which is prepared with stuffing – such as rice – how many Berachot does he recite? Must he recite two separate Berachot – "Mezonot" on the rice and "She'hakol" on the chicken – or should he recite just one Beracha? And if he must recite only one Beracha, which Beracha does he recite? The Halacha in this case depends on how one eats the chicken. If he eats the chicken and stuffing together, then they are considered a mixture, and since the chicken is the primary food, he recites "She'hakol" over the chicken and this Beracha covers the stuffing. Usually, however, when one opens the stuffed chicken the stuffing is moved to the side and eaten separately. In such a case, one would recite two separate Berachot – – "Mezonot" on the rice and "She'hakol" on the chicken. (Obviously one would recite only one Beracha Aharona after eating – "Boreh Nefashot" – which is the Beracha required for both rice and chicken.) Similarly, if a person eats stuffed artichoke, and the stuffing is made from meat, the number of Berachot required depends on how he eats it. If he eats the stuffing and artichoke separately, then he recites two separate Berachot – "Ha'adama" on the artichoke, and "She'hakol" over the meat stuffing. If, however, he eats the stuffing and artichoke together, then he recites only "Ha'adama" over the artichoke, which is considered the primary food, and this Beracha covers the stuffing, as well. This is the ruling of Hacham David Yosef, in his Halacha Berura. Often, at catered affairs, guests are served avocado stuffed with tuna fish, with the avocado being used as a cup of sorts to hold the tuna. The Yalkut Yosef notes that according to the Hayeh Adam (Rav Avraham Danzig of Vilna, 1748-1820), two foods served in this manner are treated as separate foods with respect to Berachot, and, in any event, it is difficult to ascertain which of the two foods is primary and which is subordinate. As such, one should recite two Berachot – "Ha'etz" over the avocado, and "She'hakol" over the tuna. Summary: If one eats chicken with stuffing, and he eats the chicken and stuffing mixed together, he recites "She'hakol" over the chicken and this Beracha covers the stuffing, as well. If he eats them separately, he recites two separate Berachot. If one eats artichoke with meat stuffing, he recites "Ha'adama" over the artichoke, and this covers the stuffing, as well, but if he eats them separately, he must recite separate Berachot. If one eats avocado stuffed with tuna, in all cases he recites two separate Berachot.

Although rice is not one of the standard grains (such as wheat and barley), Halacha nevertheless treats it as a grain because of its resemblance to standard grain, and thus it requires the Beracha of "Mezonot." Therefore, one recites "Mezonot" before eating cooked rice or products made from rice flour, though the Beracha Aharona recited after eating rice products is "Boreh Nefashot," and not "Al Ha'mihya." This exception is made only for rice. Products made from other types of unconventional flour, however, are not treated like products made from wheat flour, and so the Beracha is "She'ha'kol." A common example is corn flour, which is made by grinding corn, and then used to make different kinds of products. Such products require "She'ha'kol," even though the corn flour is being used in a manner similar to standard flour. The same applies to flour made from millet, soybeans, quinoa, or other grains. These are not treated like wheat flour or rice flour, and the Beracha over products made from such flour is "She'ha'kol." It should be noted that some people make the mistake of thinking that corn muffins are made from corn flour, such that they require the Beracha of "She'ha'kol." This is incorrect. Corn muffins are usually made from ordinary wheat flour, but have corn flavoring – just like blueberry muffins are made from ordinary flour, and blueberries are added for flavor. Therefore, the Beracha over corn muffins is "Mezonot," just like over ordinary muffins. Summary: Although rice flour is treated like ordinary wheat flour in that it requires the Beracha of "Mezonot," other types of unconventional flour – such as corn flour, or flour made from millet, soybeans or quinoa – are not treated like ordinary wheat flour. Therefore, products made from such flour require "She'ha'kol." One should be aware that corn muffins are made from ordinary wheat flour, with corn added for flavoring, and so the Beracha over corn muffins is "Mezonot."