In the event that one takes hands again in the middle of the meal to continue the meal, the Mishnav can take once for both of them and the hazua apparently divides, and in the case that one takes at the end of the meal for the last water, there is a dispute over the last water and in fact it can be made easier, and he will take while standing and bless what he created and sit down and bless the food blessing.
Sources: First of all regarding the matter of taking in the middle of a meal in order to continue the meal, the Mishnav does not have an obligation of two takings, but here the judges did not discuss in S. Kassa in the 23rd but about the first water, there is a problem that it is not known which blessing is required to be preceded first as the Mishna "B. C. Kesa Skb, and there is a concern that the blessing that he created is the end of the blessing of NTI, but at least there is no concern about what is taken once.
And it is true that there are some of the latter who also required the person taking a blessing in the middle of the meal to be blessed for the washing of hands, but according to the Mishnab [end of 3. Kasad and . 8 C. so that the SKT that Efi was more lenient in doing his needs and rubbing and that the custom is that according to his words there is no blessing at all for taking hands in the middle of the meal after someone who has already blessed at the beginning, and the whole mishna is one of the puzzling [even though the principle of the law has a large root for it according to the combination of many opinions In the first, after he rubs, he should bless an NTI from the main point of the law, i.e. in B.B.
In any case, what is being discussed here only comes back if one or two takings are required, and in this case the Mishnav does not rule to take two takes, and as the Mishnav C. Kassa S.K.B brought the opinion of the Maga that stops in the middle of the meal because the one who is not blessing does not bless [and the Mag A blesses only NTI, A. M.S.B. C. ke C. ke SKG, but not the one who takes it out], therefore in the middle of the meal surely A. T. B. is taking, and we are because according to his opinion the break is between the taking and the taking out.
But the Chazua Och Kaka, 13, divides that the break is between taking and eating even when he does not bless, and according to the Chazua it is possible that there is a problem here with the break of blessing that he created between taking and eating. , and there is also no problem with the break between the taking and one of the blessings that blesses it (that is, when there are two blessings that need to be blessed for the taking, which according to some of the rabbis there is a break between Hada and her companion as explained in the NKJ C. Kasa there) since in this way Daldidan blesses only one blessing of Asher created and not NTI, but the ruling is between taking it and eating the mouthful, for which the chazoa apparently is the ruling of the chazoa, and therefore those who practice according to the rulings of the chazoa may here have to clean their hands with water and bless Asher Hezer and then take their hands lawfully without a blessing and eat from the mouthful
And who it is is clear from Davin to the Mishnav and between the Haza'a, the one who needs to go to the house of the throne before taking the hands of Shacharit, A.C. to take his hands B. times Dantila A. It costs him both, and K.S. in the opinion of the author in a way that he did not rub, which is only because of the preparation.
[And in the way that he rubbed the obligation to take it is from a state in the B. C. H. M. in the name of the Hagm on the day, and in the first ones brought by the Hagman and the AH, and there are many first ones that oblige the blessing of NT when leaving the house of the throne and rubbed, and even when he did not rub 11. There is a taking from the name RoR, p. M. B. C. D. Sqm].
And only before he gets out of bed will he take it if he is not in dire need of the hospital, so that he does not have to go to the hospital.
And also the one who went to the house of the throne in B.P. So far the arbitrators have not discussed except from the side of the blessing if one should bless B.P. "CBP [this is how it is interpreted in the Rishonim and in the Bible], even if his hands were clean, such as by a dessert, he would be required to take again if he has water, as in the Shoah in the Lord's Prayer, the offering prayer, if he had already taken in water again.
Indeed, what must be satisfied here is for a NTi who takes the blessing of the food before the last water, he is in the matter of the blessing of what he created, is it permissible for him to bless the food first, or is the ruling between the last water and the last water blurred?
And the latter differed on this, the opinion of Hashel Avraham from the Do'at [to Ba'al Yida Kadochim of Botshatash, printed at the end of the Shu'at, edition of the 10th Institute] Och. He is to Hagrich Sonnenfeld] He wrote in B. C. K. P. Fahoi the ruling, and it is to be taken as his words in B. P. A. to bless the blessing that A. created before BHMZ.
And in fact it is possible that it should be alleviated since fear of danger from the salt of Sodom certainly came out, and what is being discussed here is the Darbanan Skep, and in particular the opinion of the Tos. They drove a lot in Ashkenaz].
And in particular, it became clear that according to the opinion of the Rea DSL to make it easier, and the Zal Rea in the glosses of the Shua Och C. 7 SA, and if he threw water first in the Ramza, if he did not precede it "G which is Daurieta.
Or frequent DM is better.
And it is possible to do Talia in the Ibi Dashas in frequent and holy sacrifices, it is better.
DL Dauriita regarding Darbanan is as if it is sacred and the Rambam ruled that it is sacred and often he can preempt whoever he wants.
And A. T. L. H. Baruchot 4. D. 2. D. H. Rival and in R. P. H. D. H. that the wine is a cause.
And Beth was known in Judah C. LT9.
And Tsa Ladina Akal.
And even if we were satisfied with which of them was first explained in the matter discussed here, it should be made clear that there is no obligation to take BP, and he did not mention that there is a break between what he created and the blessing of the food.
There is indeed reason to say, on the other hand, precisely because this doubt has not been resolved, he will have to aim for the first time purely for the Neti Dabhakhas and take the last water, and only by taking the latter to aim for the last water in order to get out of the hands of a doubt, but GZ does not seem to have gotten rid of "7 The obligation of the Darmia that begins with it is to take the last water and bless, and if he does not take it, this does not relieve him of the obligation, and only if he wants to continue with the feast, in which there is no longer an obligation, he must take it and bless immediately, this does not enter into doubt, but it does not mean that he will be in the wrong "A that he should be obliged to leave the doubt above.
It should also be noted that Degbi, who takes his hands for a meal, the main point of what the latter wrote is that the first taking should be in the manner of taking a taking that is raised only for cleanliness, and the last 20 to be careful that the first taking is not a finished taking according to the Mishnab Kassa Skav, and in this it is resolved that there is no It is necessary to enter into the provision of the ruling between the taking and the blessing, since the first taking is not binding but one blessing, and the last taking is not binding but one blessing, but if he took the first taking according to law, he gets into a problem with this [and MAM since it is not because he does not bless an ENTI for taking a first as a mash The name of the 19th century SKO], but in the last waters since DKIL Dain the details are hindering, so there won't be a complete solution to this in that the second person takes talismans and blesses them, and the closing of the Mishnab that the condemned person did not bring, perhaps there is room to learn from the one that did not see I was concerned about this, Wila, but if it is said yes, it should be discussed what the division that created between taking and the blessing of the spender will really be, in which the Mishnab brought a final dispute [Kasa Skav] if he decided, and between what he created, between taking and the blessing of the food in this just The Mishnab and did not mention that there is a concern about the ruling and the above, and perhaps the division is that the taking is for the purpose of eating, as in the last water, the taking is not for the blessing of the food but the disposal of the meal, and this includes even if he has a blessing that needs to be blessed now at the disposal of the meal if it is a blessing that precedes the blessing The food, according to the Mishnab that he blessed which he created after the blessing of the food and as above on this side of the Gera.
And from M.M., one who makes it easy, as I wrote, to take a prayer, what will he actually do in the blessing he created, since there is doubt whether he will bless a code or later, and it should be said that he will take it while standing, and by this the doubt is removed, since any time we do not sit down, it applies to him to start the blessing now who created and still does not have an obligation to start blessing the food now and there are no transgressors of the mitzvot.
(Based on my answer in Am Segulah 11 C. 4 Skag with more legal innovations and halachic clarifications that I have now added)
מק"ט התשובה הוא: 2472 והקישור הישיר של התשובה הוא: shchiche.com/2472
