|  |  | Previous Folio / Berakoth Contents / Tractate List / Navigate Site # Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Berakoth ### Folio 42a because it is itself a motive for benediction.1 R. Huna ate thirteen rolls2 of three to a kab without saying a blessing after them. Said R. Nahman to him: This is what [you call] hunger.3 [R. Nahman is consistent with his own view, for R. Nahman said:]4 Anything which others make the mainstay of a meal requires a grace to be said after it. Rab Judah gave a wedding feast for his son in the house of R. Judah b. Habiba.5 They set before the guests bread such as is taken with dessert. He came in and heard them saying the benediction ha-Mozi.6 He said to them: What is this zizi that I hear? Are you perhaps saying the blessing 'who bringest forth bread from the earth'? — They replied: We are, since it has been taught: R. Muna said in the name of R. Judah: Over bread which is taken with dessert the benediction 'who bringest forth bread' is said; and Samuel said that the halachah is as stated by R. Muna. He said to them: It has been stated that the halachah is not as stated by R. Muna. They said to him: Is it not the Master himself who has said in the name of Samuel that bread wafers may be used for an erub,7 and the blessing said over them is 'who bringest forth bread'? — [He replied]: There [we speak] of a different case, namely, where they are made the basis of the meal; but if they are not the basis of the meal, this does not apply. R. Papa was once at the house of R. Huna the son of R. Nathan. After they had finished the meal, eatables were set before them and R. Papa took some and commenced to eat. They said to him: Does not the Master hold that after the meal is finished it is forbidden to eat?8 He replied: 'Removed'9 is the proper term.10 Raba and R. Zera once visited the Exilarch. After they had removed the tray from before them, a gift [of fruit] was sent them from the Exilarch. Raba partook, but R. Zera did not partake. Said the latter to him: Does not the Master hold that if the food has been removed it is forbidden to eat? He replied: We can rely on the tray of the Exilarch.11 Rab said: If one is accustomed to [rub his hands with] oil [after a meal], he can wait for the oil.12 R. Ashi said: When we were with R. Kahana he said to us: I, for instance, who am accustomed to use oil, can wait for the oil. But the law is not as stated in all those dicta reported above, but as thus stated by R. Hiyya b. Ashi in the name of Rab: Three things should follow immediately one on the other. The killing [of the sacrifice] should follow immediately on the laying on of hands. Tefillah should follow immediately on ge'ullah.13 Grace should follow immediately on the washing of hands.14 Abaye said: We will add another case. A blessing follows immediately on [the entertaining of] scholars, since it says, The Lord hath blessed me for thy sake.15 If you prefer, I can learn it from here: The Lord blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake.16 MISHNAH. A BLESSING SAID OVER THE WINE TAKEN BEFORE THE MEAL17 SERVES ALSO FOR THE WINE TAKEN AFTER THE MEAL.18 A BLESSING OVER THE HORS D'OEUVRES19 TAKEN BEFORE THE MEAL SERVES FOR THE SWEETS19 TAKEN AFTER THE MEAL. A BLESSING OVER BREAD SERVES FOR THE SWEETS BUT A BLESSING OVER THE HORS D'OEUVRES DOES NOT SERVE FOR THE BREAD. BETH SHAMMAI SAY: NEITHER [DOES IT SERVE] FOR A COOKED DISH. IF [THOSE AT THE TABLE] ARE SITTING UPRIGHT,20 EACH ONE SAYS GRACE FOR HIMSELF; IF THEY HAVE RECLINED, ONE SAYS GRACE FOR ALL. To Part b Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files When used for such purposes as sanctification, and not merely as a beverage. With the 'nibblings'. I.e., such is enough to satisfy any hunger, and therefore should necessitate grace after it. The original is obscure and the meaning doubtful. Inserted with MS.M. and deleting 'but' of cur. edd. Var. lec., R. Habiba. The ordinary blessing over bread. I.e., they are reckoned as substantial food. Until grace after meals had first been said, after which a fresh benediction has to be said. I.e., it is permissible (if grace has not yet been said) to eat as long as the table has not actually been cleared away. Lit., 'it has been stated'. I.e., we can be sure that more food will come. I.e., he can go on eating till the oil is brought, even if the table has been cleared. Lit., 'the oil impedes him'. v. supra. 4b, 9b. The second washing, at the end of the meal, the 'latter water' (v. infra 53b). and this washing is the signal that the meal is finished, whether or not the table has been cleared. Gen. XXX, 27. Ibid. XXXIX, 5. As an appetizer. Before grace is said. Lit., 'dainty'. I.e., do not form a party. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference ### Berakoth 42b IF WINE IS BROUGHT TO THEM IN THE COURSE OF THE MEAL, EACH ONE SAYS A BENEDICTION FOR HIMSELF; IF AFTER THE MEAL, ONE SAYS IT FOR ALL. THE SAME ONE SAYS [THE BENEDICTION] OVER THE PERFUME,1 ALTHOUGH THE PERFUME IS NOT BROUGHT IN TILL AFTER THE MEAL.2 GEMARA. Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Johanan: This3 was meant to apply only to Sabbaths and festivals, because then a man makes wine an essential part of his meal.4 On others days of the year, however, a blessing is said over each cup,5 it has also been reported: Rabbah b. Mari said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi: This was meant to apply only to Sabbaths and festivals, and to meals taken when a man leaves the bath or after bloodletting, because on such occasions a man makes wine an essential part of the meal. On other days of the year, however, a blessing is said over each cup. Rabbah b. Mari was once at the house of Raba on a weekday. He saw him say a blessing [over the wine taken] before the meal and again after the meal. He said to him: 'Well done; and so said R. Joshua b. Levi!' R. Isaac b. Joseph visited Abaye on a festival, and saw him say a blessing over each cup. He said to him: Does your honour not hold with the rule laid down by R. Joshua b. Levi? — He replied: I have just changed my mind.6 A question was asked: If wine was brought round in the course of the meal [but not before], can a blessing over it serve for the wine taken after the meal as well? Should you cite the ruling that A BLESSING SAID OVER THE WINE TAKEN BEFORE THE MEAL SERVES FOR WINE TAKEN AFTER THE MEAL, this may be because both are [drunk] for the sake of drinking. Here, however, where one cup is for steeping [the food in] and the other for drinking. shall I say that this is not the rule, or perhaps it makes no difference? — Rab replied that it does serve; R. Kahana that it does not; R. Nahman held that it does serve; R. Shesheth that it does not serve. R. Huna and Rab Judah and all the disciples of Rab held that it does not serve. Raba raised an objection to R. Nahman: IF WINE IS BROUGHT TO THEM IN THE COURSE OF THE MEAL, EACH ONE SAYS A BLESSING FOR HIMSELF; IF AFTER THE MEAL, ONE SAYS IT FOR ALL.7 — He replied: The meaning is this: If no wine was brought in during the course of the meal but only after the meal, one says the blessing on behalf of all. A BLESSING OVER BREAD SERVES FOR THE SWEETS, BUT A BLESSING OVER THE HORS D'OEUVRES DOES NOT SERVE FOR THE BREAD. BETH SHAMMAI SAY: NEITHER [DOES IT SERVE] FOR A COOKED DISH. The question was asked: Do Beth Shammai differ with regard to the first part of the statement or the second part? [Do we understand] that the First Tanna said that A BLESSING OVER BREAD SERVES FOR THE SWEETS and a fortiori for cooked dishes, and Beth Shammai on the contrary maintained that not merely does the blessing over bread not suffice for the sweets but it does not serve even for the cooked dishes; or are we perhaps to understand that they differ as to the second half of the statement, that A BLESSING OVER THE HORS D'OEUVRES DOES NOT SERVE FOR THE BREAD, which implies that it does not indeed serve for bread but it does serve for cooked dishes, and Beth Shammai on the contrary maintain that it does not serve even for cooked dishes? — This is left undecided. IF [THEY] ARE SITTING UPRIGHT, EACH ONE etc. If they are reclining he may, if not he may not. With this was contrasted the following: If ten persons were travelling on the road, even though all eat of one loaf, each one says grace for himself; but if they sat down to eat, even though each one eats of his own loaf, one may say grace on behalf of all. It says here, 'sat', which implies, although they did not recline? — R. Nahman b. Isaac replied: This is the case if for instance, they say: Let us go and eat bread in such and such a place.8 When Rab died, his disciples followed his bier. When they returned9 they said, Let us go and eat a meal by the river Danak.10 After they had eaten, they sat and discussed the question: When we learnt 'reclining', is it to be taken strictly, as excluding sitting, or perhaps, when they say, Let us go and eat bread in such and such a place, it is as good as reclining? They could not find the answer. R. Adda b. Ahabah rose - To Next Folio - Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files I.e., spices put on coals and brought in after grace is said. And grace has intervened between it and the vine. That a blessing said over wine before the meal serves for wine after the meal. The reason is that from the beginning there is an intention to drink later. Rashi: he intends to linger at the table after the meal and drink wine. Because each cup requires a separate intention. To drink an additional cup, as I did not intend at first to take more wine after the meal. Assuming that the grace after the meal refers to a second serving of wine, this seems to show that wine taken in the course of the meal does not serve for wine taken after. Which is equivalent to making a party. Rab was buried in another town from that in which his Academy was situated. Perhaps a mistake for Anak, a river near Sura; v. MS.M. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference |  |  |