Yerushalmi Berakhot 6:1 ירושלמי ברכות ו׳:א׳

MISHNAH: Which benedictions are recited on produce¹Before one eats of these fruits, as will be explained in the Halakhah. All benedictions start with “Praise to You, Eternal, our God, King of the Universe”. This formula is understood and does not have to be repeated.? On tree-grown fruits one says “Creator of the fruit of the tree” except for wine, because on wine one says “Creator of the fruit of the vine.” But on fruits of the land one says “Creator of the fruit of the soil” except for bread, because on bread²The words “because on bread” are not in the Venice print but since they appear in the Leyden manuscript the omission seems to be a printer’s error. one says “He Who produces bread from the earth.” On vegetables one says “Creator of the fruit of the soil”, Rebbi Yehudah says: “Creator of kinds of vegetables³Rebbi Yehudah insists that benedictions should be exact and vegetables without seeds do not qualify as “fruits”..”

HALAKHAH: It is written (Ps. 24:1): “The Eternal’s are the earth and what is in it, the dry land and its inhabitants.” He who profits from the world commits larceny⁴Since he uses God’s property, not his own. until good deeds will permit him⁵The obligation to say Grace after a meal is spelled out in Deut. 8:10. The obligation to recite blessings before one eats is not mentioned explicitly in the Torah. Since Grace is only treated in the next Chapter, one has to find here Biblical allusions to this duty and (in the next section) to the duty of reciting a benediction before fulfilling specified commandments.
The verse appears in the Babli (35a) in the name of Samuel. R. Levi compares the verse (Ps. 115:16) “Heaven is the Eternal’s heaven but the earth He gave to mankind”, explaining that before a benediction everything is the Eternal’s property but after a benediction it becomes human property. While Rebbi Levi is a Galilean teacher, the Yerushalmi rejects his combination since in the third paragraph earthly enjoyment is only “as if one ate from one’s own”. The text of the Yerushalmi is from Tosephta Berakhot 4:1 which is identical with the Talmudic text except that there it says “until all good deeds will permit him”, meaning that only if the preparation of food is completely within the commandments of the Torah then the last step of the preparation, the recitation of the benediction, will allow the food to be given to man as his own.. Rebbi Abbahu said, it is written (Deut. 22:9) “Lest the fullness of the seed that you sow and the yield of the vineyard should be forbidden.” The entire world and its contents are like a vineyard. What is its redemption? The benediction⁶This argument is very difficult to understand and the commentators either chose to ignore it or give very incongruous explanations. The best explanation is that of R. Eliahu Fulda who in his Yerushalmi edition suppresses the word פֶּן “lest”. One would have to assume that Rebbi Abbahu’s text did not have the word but that later scribes added it from memory. By it the negative implication of the verse (which speaks about growing different kinds of plants in a vineyard) are changed to a positive one which now should be translated: “That you shall sanctify the fullness of the seed that you sow and the yield of the vineyard.” Since the sanctity is not that of sacrifices, the sanctity may be removed by redemption (Lev. 27:11). However, there can be no monetary redemption of anything not explicitly authorized in the Torah. Hence, the redemption is non-monetary and is the traditional praise given to God in benedictions. [The simple sense of the verse is that produce grown in a vineyard becomes forbidden for private use as if it were dedicated for sacrifice.]. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: (Ps. 16:2) “Say to the Eternal, You are my Master⁷The translation follows the Biblical text, not the text written here., my good is only with You.” If you ate and recited the benedictions then it is as if you ate from your own. Another explanation⁸The verse is extremely hard to understand; the next two interpretations have nothing to do with the topic on hand; they are only added to indicate translations that might be considered if בל is not a negation but a verb form derived from בלל, which may mean either “to give food” (Jud. 19:24) or, more frequently, “mixed with fluid, moistened.”: “My good is בל with you”, I am feeding My goodness to your body. Another explanation: “My good is בל with you”, all good things may be mixed together and come to you. Rebbi Aḥa said, what is “only with you?” I shall not bring any good things to the world without you. As it is said (Gen. 41:44) “Without you nobody may lift his hand.⁹Taking בל as shorthand for בִּלְעֲדֵי “without”.” Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: (Lev. 19:24) “Holy for praises”, this shows that it needs benediction before and after. From here did Rebbi Aqiba say that nobody should taste anything before he gives praise¹⁰This is also quoted in the Babli (35a); the source of both Talmudim is Sifra on the verse. The verse speaks of the fruits of a vineyard in its fourth year when the grapes can be used for the first time after having been forbidden for the first three years. This is only a hint for any other food..

Rebbi Ḥaggai and Rebbi Jeremiah went to the Bazaar¹¹The translation is tentative; בית חנוותא means “the house of stores”, which might be a description of a shuq even though it is difficult to explain why the word שׁוּקָא was not used. It is not clear what kind of miẓwah the two rabbis performed in the market. In the opinion of R. Eleazar Askari they were agoranomoi, overseers of weights and measures, and Rebbi Ḥaggai recited a benediction before starting to go from stall to stall and checking the balances for correctness since that is a Biblical commandment repeated several times in the Pentateuch (Deut. 25:15, Lev. 19:36) in addition to the prohibition of fraudulent business practices.
The Rome manuscript has instead of בית חנוותא the expression לְמֵי חַטָּאתָה “the water for the ashes of the read heifer”, the drawing of which certainly would need a benediction. The Talmud reports that Rebbi Ḥaggai finished his Talmud studies with Rav Ḥuna I at age 18 and lived to be 160 years old; so, as shown in the commentary to Mishnah 1:1, he still could have seen ashes of the read heifer, but these could not have been preserved at the time of Rebbi Jeremiah who lived during the third and fourth generations of Amoraïm, even if these ashes were uniquely reserved for Cohanim eating Terumah.
R. Zachariah Frankel wants to emend to בֵּית חַתְנוּתָא “place of a wedding” but his reading has no basis in antique or medieval sources.. Rebbi Ḥaggai was quick to recite a blessing. Rebbi Jeremiah said to him: You acted correctly because all commandments need a benediction. And from where that all commandments¹²After establishing benedictions before the consumption of food one establishes now the need for benedictions before the execution of positive commandments (by tradition, only those to be performed at specific times or occasions, not those that are always valid). need a benediction? Rebbi Tanḥuma, Rebbi Abba bar Cahana in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: (Ex. 24:12) “I want to give you the stone tablets, the Torah and the commandment¹³The verse really reads: “both Torah and Commandments”. The double vaw in the verse is essential for R. Eleazar’s argument..” It brackets Torah and commandment. Just as Torah needs a benediction, a commandment also needs benediction.

Rebbi Yoḥanan took an olive¹⁴Here starts the actual discussion of the rules given in the Mishnah. R. Ḥiyya bar Abba’s report on the story appears also in the Babli (38b–39a) but there the argument and the inferences drawn are totally different. In the Babli, R. Ḥiyya bar Abba reports that the olive was salted, which seems natural since raw olives are bitter. The discussion in the Babli is whether pickling or cooking changes the applicable benediction; it is clear from this paragraph that at least for the “Seven Kinds” the Yerushalmi does not contemplate any change in benedictions. and recited a benediction before and after. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba was looking at him. Rebbi Yoḥanan said to him: Babylonian, why are you looking at me? Don’t you agree that everything from the Seven Kinds¹⁵The Seven Kinds are “the fruits for which the Land of Israel is praised”, enumerated in Deut. 8:8: “A land of wheat and barley, vine and fig, and pomegranate; a land of oil olive and (date) honey.” Since in v. 10 it is stated “when you will eat and be satiated, you must praise the Eternal, your God, for the good land that He gave you,” it follows that these kinds need a benediction afterwards that contains praise for food, land, (and Jerusalem.) This is called “one benediction in the kind of three”; the three benedictions are reserved for grain eaten in the form of bread. The benediction before is the applicable one of those mentioned in the Mishnah. needs a benediction before and after? He agrees. What is his problem? Because its pit reduces it¹⁶In general, anything smaller than the volume of an average olive is too insignificant to require a benediction. The edible part of an olive is much smaller than the volume of an average olive.. Does Rebbi Yoḥanan agree that its pit reduces it? What Rebbi Yoḥanan did was because of a creature¹⁷The Babli (loc. cit.) conjectures that R. Yoḥanan ate a large olive which even if pitted still has the size of an average olive. The Yerushalmi here is emphatic that any complete edible fruit needs a benediction before and after it is eaten, irrespective of size.. The word of Rebbi Yoḥanan implies that even one berry from a pomegranate needs a benediction before and after¹⁸A pomegranate is full of seeds; each seed is surrounded by fruit flesh encased in a membrane. One such cell containing the seed and the fruit flesh is a berry. Without the seed it would not be a creature and without the fruit flesh it would not be edible but with both it needs benediction before and after if the membrane is untouched..

¹⁹Parallel texts in Tosephta Berakhot 4:3 and Babli 50b.“Wine in its natural state²⁰A heavy subtropical wine with an alcohol content of close to 15%, unmixed with any water., one says for it ‘Creator of the fruit of the tree’²¹R. Eliezer holds that no human will want to drink such a heavy dose of alcohol or at least it is not admissible to have such unmixed wine at a formal dinner. and one may not use it to wash his hands²²Hands must be washed with water and while fruit juice is considered water, in the opinion of R. Eliezer pure wine is not.; when it is mixed²³Standard mixing is one part wine to two parts water for an alcohol content of about 5%, Mishnah Niddah2:7., one says for it ‘Creator of the fruit of the vine’ and one may use it to wash his hands; these are the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, both pure and mixed one says over it ‘Creator of the fruit of the vine’ and one may use it to wash his hands²⁴All sources of the Tosephta read everywhere “one may not” where the Yerushalmi has “one may”, and “one may” where the Yerushalmi has “one may not”. In the Babli, all sources read “one may” the first and last time but in the second instance some manuscripts and authorities follow readings of the Tosephta and some (Munich manuscript and some Medieval authorities) the readings of the Yerushalmi..” Rebbi Abba said, it is not forbidden because of wasting food²⁵In general, wilful spoiling of food is a sin. It seems that the Yerushalmi restricts the use of fruit juice for washing of the hands to the ritual washing before eating bread, since that is part of the meal, but that washing with fruit juice just for cleansing is forbidden. The Gaonic Halakhot Gedolot explains that the prohibition of the Sages (in the version of the Babli) refers to the sin of wasting food..

Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu²⁶In the Babli (35b) this is a statement of R. Yoḥanan. The argument of R. Ḥiyya bar Pappus is purely Yerushalmi.: On olive oil one recites “Creator of the fruit of the tree.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Pappus²⁷An otherwise unknown Galilean Amora. In the Rome manuscript, his name is Rebbi Ḥinena bar Pappus. said before Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah says so. “Except for wine because on wine one says ‘Creator of the fruit of the vine’.” Is wine not mashed²⁸Grape juice is really pressed, but so is olive oil, and only second and third pressings of oil are from ground olives. In any case, wine goes through a fermentation process and cannot be described as being “recognizable in its state.”? But it says only “except for wine”, hence all other things even if they are mashed are recognizable in their state.

Rebbi Abba²⁹In the Babli (38b), Samuel is said to hold a different opinion. The Galilean authorities quoted there are those of the next paragraph. The interpretations of Babli and Yerushalmi differ. said: Rav and Samuel both say, on cooked vegetable one says “that everything was created by His word.” Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Samuel: Large cooked³⁰שלוק “cooked in water” in contrast to מבושל “cooked in broth”. pieces of liftan³¹As a plant, לפתן means “beets”, but generally it means cooked vegetables served as main dish with bread (pitta bread to be used as fork and spoon in the absence of tableware except knives.) Meat was only eaten on special occasions, such as Sabbath, holidays, visits of important people, and after bleeding., if they are recognizable one says on them “Creator of the fruit of the earth;” if one mashed them one says “He, by Whose word everything was created.” Rebbi Yose said, does the Mishnah say so? “Except for bread because on bread one says ‘He Who produces bread from the earth.’.” Is bread not mashed³²Flour is ground (“mashed”) grain, one of the Seven Kinds.? But it says only “except for bread”, hence all other things even if they are mashed are recognizable in their state³³Hence, the statement of Rebbi Abba is superior to that of Rebbi Zeïra. This conclusion is the opposite of that of the Babli..

³⁴The entire paragraph is also found in Pesaḥim 2:5. One word in the current text has been corrected following that Yerushalmi text. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: One says “Creator of the fruit of the tree” on marinated³⁵This is the exact meaning of the corresponding Arabic כַּבַּסַ. olives. Rebbi Benjamin bar Jephet in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: One says “By Whose word everything was created³⁶The general benediction on everything not expressly mentioned in the Mishnah.” on water-cooked vegetables. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said: a Mishnah supports Rebbi Benjamin bar Yephet: (Pesaḥim2:6) “but not marinated or cooked in water or cooked in broth³⁷The Mishnah enumerates all herbs which qualify as “bitter herbs” on Passover, adding that these herbs are not usable if cooked or marinated. The implication is that after treatment they are no longer herbs but general food.”; if they were recognizable in their state one could fulfill his duty with them on Passover. Rebbi Zeïra said, who understands well what Rebbi Yoḥanan said, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba or Rebbi Benjamin bar Yephet? Not Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba?³⁸R. Ḥiyya bar Abba studied much more intensively than R. Benjamin bar Yephet. This is the argument and conclusion of the Babli (38b). The refutation of Rebbi Zeïra’s argument is not in that Talmud. And in addition from the fact that we see great rabbis going to a mourner’s meal, eat lupines³⁹Greek θέρμος. Raw lupines are cattle feed, too bitter for human consumption. They become edible only after long cooking. This statement supports R. Ḥiyya bar Abba. and recite on them “Creator of the fruit of the earth;” Are not lupines certainly cooked? If you want, you may say there is a difference, since the Torah said “bitter herbs”, and cooked lupines have lost their bitterness. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, they⁴⁰R. Ḥiyya bar Abba and R. Benjamin bar Yephet. have no disagreement. Since olives usually are eaten fresh, they are recognizable in their state even if they are marinated. Vegetables are changed once they are cooked⁴¹One must assume that roots of lupine keep their shape and general appearance in cooking just as olives do. The rule that vegetables which are inedible unless cooked require the blessing “Creator of the fruit of the earth” is the opinion of Rav Ḥisda in the Babli (loc. cit.)..

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Rebbi Neḥemiah and the rabbis disagree. Rebbi Neḥemiah said: “Who produced bread from the earth.” But the rabbis say, “Who produces bread from the earth.⁴³In the Babli (38a), the opinion ascribed here to the rabbis is that of Rebbi Neḥemiah and vice versa. This eliminates the question which the Yerushalmi raises about the current text of the benediction. In the opinion of the Babli, the preferred version (R. Neḥemiah here, the rabbis in the Babli) takes the present participle in an atemporal sense.” This disagreement is like that disagreement: לפת, Rebbi Ḥinena bar Isaac⁴⁴A preacher of the third generation of Galilean Amoraïm. The name of his teacher is unknown. and Rebbi Samuel bar Immi⁴⁵A Galilean Amora of the third generation who also appears as R. Samuel bar Ammi. His father and father-in-law also were rabbis.; one said “lefet, was it not bread?⁴⁵A Galilean Amora of the third generation who also appears as R. Samuel bar Ammi. His father and father-in-law also were rabbis.” and the other one said “lefet, will it not be bread”? (Ps. 72:16) “There will be a piece of flour on the land, on mountain tops.⁴⁷Since flour cannot form a loaf until it is baked, this means that bread will grow on mountain tops. This is a homily of R. Yoḥanan in Midrash Tehillim 92(6), which appears in the name of several other Amoraïm in Babli Šabbat 30b, Ketubot 111b.” Rebbi Jeremiah recited before Rebbi Zeïra “Who produced bread from the earth” and the latter praised him. Following Rebbi Neḥemiah⁴⁸One is not supposed to follow a minority of one, much less to be praised for it.? Not to amalgamate the letters⁴⁹So that הָעוֹלָם מוֹצִיא should not be pronounced ha‘ôlāmôẓî, but clearly be said in two distinct words.! If it is so, הַמִּין הָאָרֶץ⁵⁰Since לֶחֶם מִן also has two consecutive mem and could be read together. However, the change proposed here makes no sense; nobody wants to pronounce a meaningless benediction that would be close to blasphemy. The question does not merit an answer.? In the opinion of Rebbi Neḥemiah⁵¹One wonders why they disagree only about the language for bread and not for wine., “He Who created the fruit of the vine”; in the opinion of the rabbis “Who creates the fruit of the vine.”

Rebbi Zeriqan said: Rebbi Zeïra asked: He who took a lupine and was reciting the benediction over it when it fell from his hand, does he have to recite a second benediction⁵²Since the cooked lupine root becomes inedible when it falls into the dust, he has to take another one, not the one for which the benediction was intended.? What is the difference between that and a water canal⁵³Since one has to say the benediction on water before one starts to drink, the water drops one drinks are not those that were in the same place at the moment of the benediction.? They said, there he intended it from the start, but here he did not intend it from the start. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: One recites the benediction on bread only when one breaks it⁵⁴The formulation in the Babli (39a) is: Rebbi Ḥiyya said, the benediction and the breaking of the bread must be finished simultaneously. This is accepted practice in the Yerushalmi, but is rejected in the Babli in favor of a ruling of the much later, fourth generation Babylonian Amora Rava who requires that the benediction be completely recited before one starts to break the bread.. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: This means that he who took a loaf⁵⁵The usual expression פַּת for bread designates a pittah; עִיגוּל here is a loaf of bread; it might be a round cake of pressed figs. R. Asher ben Yeḥiel copies the passage (Chapter 6, #20) which has פּוּגְלָא “a radish” instead of “a loaf”. That reading seems to be a copyist’s error. and pronounced the benediction on it before it came to his hand, must recite a second benediction. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan⁵⁶A Galilean Amora whose time cannot be determined. said, he must say “Praised be the Name of the Glory of His kingdom forever and ever,” in order not to utter the Name of Heaven in vain⁵⁷By a statement of R. Yoḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish in the Babli (33a), any unnecessary benediction is a violation of the Fifth Commandment..

How far may he break⁵⁸There are two connected problems here. The first one, what is the minimum size of a piece of bread (or any other food) that requires a benediction beforehand; the second, if one person makes a benediction over bread for an entire company (with the other participants answering “Amen” instead of reciting their own benedictions), what is the minimal size of a piece of bread that every participant has to receive and eat after the benediction. For Grace after meals, the situation is clear. The requirement from the Torah (Deut. 8:10) is “when you will have eaten and will be satiated then you must praise the Eternal …”; the Biblical obligation applies only after a full meal. The rabbinic obligation explicitly applies to food that fills at least the volume of an olive; smaller amounts do not require Grace and, according the preceding paragraph, one may not recite Grace for such minute amounts. But since benedictions before eating are all rabbinic institutions, the problem is whether food in an amount less than the volume of an average olive must (or may) have a benediction and, if a benediction is recited on a larger loaf, whether the piece eaten immediately after the recitation of the benediction must be the size of an olive or not.
The Babli (37b) has another angle to the problem. Since bread has a separate benediction from cereal and cakes, how small may the recognizable pieces of bread in cereal or soup be so that it still falls under the category of bread rather than cereal or soup?? Rebbi Ḥinena and Rebbi Mana, one says down to the size of an olive, the other says even smaller than the size of an olive. He who says down to the size of an olive, as it is stated “all⁵⁹This refers to Mishnah Menaḥot7:4 that all flour offerings prepared in a vessel (baked or fried) must be broken into pieces before a handful of them is burned on the altar. There are two opinions on the size of admissible pieces (also reported Babli Berakhot 37a). are crumbled into olive-size pieces.” He who says, smaller than the size of an olive: “Rebbi Ismael stated, even if he reduced it⁶⁰The baked or fried flour-offering. to its original form of fine flour.” It has been stated⁶¹The first half of this statement appears in Tosephta Berakhot 4:7.: “On everything that needs three benedictions at the end one says ‘He Who produces bread from the earth’ at the start, but on everything that does not need three benedictions at the end one does not say ‘He Who produces bread from the earth’ at the start.” They objected: But if it is less than the size of an olive, one does not say three benedictions at the end. Does this mean that one should not say “He Who produces bread from the earth” at the start? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, it is needed for other kinds⁶²The statement does not refer to size, but to kinds of food; if it is not bread it does not receive the benediction for bread. Hence, no conclusion as to the correct practice can be drawn..

Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav: Those assembled may not taste anything before the one who recited the benediction did taste. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: They may drink even if he did not drink. Do they disagree? Rav said in case all need the same loaf⁶³Which is the normal case if there is a real loaf of bread and not pittot. But wine everybody drinks from his own glass that was filled beforehand. The question whether the one who recites the benediction should eat first and then distribute the bread or vice versa is addressed in the next paragraph. [The parallel in the Babli (47a) has only the statement of Rav; there it is explained that לטעום “to taste”, usually applied to drinking, here means “eating” as is clear from the Yerushalmi.] but Rebbi Joshua said when each one had his own cup in his hand.

It has been stated: The one who recited the benediction takes first⁶⁴From the food on his plate (Babli 47a). but if he wants to honor his teacher or someone who is greater than himself in Torah, he has the right to do so. When Rav was breaking bread he was eating with his left hand and distributing with his right hand⁶⁵To minimize the time between the benediction and the actual eating by the other participants in the meal.. Rav Huna said: “Take and recite a benediction, take and recite a benediction” is not an interruption for the benediction⁶⁶Since it is needed for the other person’s benediction, it will not cause the person who made the original benediction to forget that he made the benediction in order to eat.; “give hay to the oxen” is an interruption for the benediction⁶⁷In the Babli (40a) this is the opinion of R. Yoḥanan (i. e., the Yerushalmi), but there practice follows R. Sheshet who quotes Rav to the effect that nobody may eat as long as his animals are hungry; hence, the order to feed the oxen is a necessary step in preparing to eat..

Rab Ḥuna said: On shatita⁶⁸The Aramaic shatita is the same as Latin moretum, a dish made by mixing pounded roasted flour or pounded roasted pea meal with water or vinegar (and other ingredients.) Its preparation is described in the Babli Avodah zarah 36b and in great detail in the poem Moretum in Appendix Vergiliana [cf. E. and H. Guggenheimer, לשוננוּ vol. 36 (5733) pp. 105–112]. In the Babli (Berakhot 31a), the rule of R. Huna applies only to watery moretum. This and the following rule are placed here to collect all formal statements of Rav Huna on benedictions for food. [An intermediate between šĕtîtā and moretum may be Greek μυττωτός “dish composed of pounded ingredients”, title of a poem by Virgil’s teacher Parthenios and model of Virgil’s moretum(E. G.).], which is ground moretum, one recites “that everything was created by His word”.

Rav Huna said: If one put something into his mouth and forgot to recite the benediction, if it is fluid he spits it out, if it is food he puts it to one side⁶⁹In the Babli (50b–51a), Rav Yehudah, a student of Rav but mainly of Samuel, has three categories: Fluids he swallows, food that can be taken out he takes out, food that one cannot touch once it is in the mouth he puts into one cheek. In the Babli, the verse of R. Yoḥanan is quoted to prove that food which can be taken out without problems must be taken out. While the Yerushalmi states a clear difference between Babylonian and Israeli practice, the Babli harmonizes both practices.. Rebbi Isaac bar Mari⁷⁰His name appears only here. In the Babli (loc. cit.) he is called רִבִּי יִצְחָק קַסְקַסָּאָה, cf. Latin cascus “old, old-fashioned” (E. G.). [The word קסקסים that appears in Tosephta and Babli is explained by Rashi as weeds, by S. Lieberman as rock outcrops in a field, from קשקשים “fins”, by J. Levy as clumps of earth or stones hewn from a rock.] before Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan even if it is food he takes it out since it is written (Ps. 71:8) “May my mouth be full of Your praise⁷²This text is also in Tosephta Berakhot 4:6. It is quoted in Babli 37a where, however, the formula “Creator of kinds of seeds” is replaced by “Creator of the fruit of the earth” since the Babli does not recognize any benediction for produce not mentioned by the majority opinion in the Mishnah., all day long of Your glory.”

He who chews wheat kernels says on them “Creator of kinds of seeds.” If he baked or cooked them, as long as pieces are recognizable he recites on them “He Who produces bread from the earth” and afterwards three benedictions. If the pieces are not recognizable, he recites “Creator of kinds of food” and afterwards one benediction in the kind of three⁷²This text is also in Tosephta Berakhot 4:6. It is quoted in Babli 37a where, however, the formula “Creator of kinds of seeds” is replaced by “Creator of the fruit of the earth” since the Babli does not recognize any benediction for produce not mentioned by the majority opinion in the Mishnah.. Down to which size are there pieces? Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun, Cahana bar Malkiah⁷³Rav Cahana bar Malkio in the Babli, whose quote of a statement of Rav is quoted by Rebbi Jeremiah. Hence, his time has to be fixed between Rav and the emigration of Rebbi Jeremiah from Babylonia. The statement here is not identical with the earlier one that dealt with pieces of bread eaten by themselves. In the interpretation of Tosaphot (37b), his statement is rejected by the Babli. in the name of Rav: down to olive-sized bits.

He who chews rice⁷⁴Greek ὄρυζα. says for it: “Creator of kinds of seeds.” If he baked or cooked it, even if there are recognizable pieces he says for it: “Creator of kinds of food” and he does not have to recite a benediction afterwards⁷⁵Tosephta Berakhot 4:7. Rebbi Jeremiah quotes the Tosephta in the Babli (37a) which also disagrees about the concluding benediction. The next paragraph will show that “no benediction afterwards” really means “no lengthy benediction afterwards”, only the short form.. Rebbi Jeremiah said, “Creator of the fruit of the earth.” Bar Marina recited before Rebbi Zeïra and Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba “By Whose word everything was created.⁷⁶From their silence one may infer that they agreed.” Rebbi Simeon the pious said “Creator of all sorts of delicacies.” Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: They do not disagree. He who says “Creator of kinds of food”, if he made it into a ball. He who said “Creator of the fruit of the earth”, if it is separated⁷⁷If the individual kernels are still recognizable, in contrast to the ball (Latin bulla) in which no individual kernels are visible.. He who said “By Whose word everything was created”, if it is cooked in water a long time⁷⁸If it is a mash.. He who said “Creator of all sorts of delicacies”, if it is torn⁷⁹If one bakes any kind of rice product with spices, except whole grains. [The Babli does not admit different benedictions for different cases.].

That is beforehand. Afterwards, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Simeon the pious: “He Who created all sorts of delicacies to delight with them the souls of all living. Praise to You, Eternal, for the Land and its delicacies.”⁸⁰It is implied that the four admissible benedictions for baked or cooked rice (and all other food not covered otherwise) requires a final benediction adapted to the corresponding intial benediction. [Again, the Babli has only one form of the short final benediction, the one given in the Yerushalmi for meat.]

Rebbi Abba bar Jacob in the name of the great Rebbi Isaac⁸¹He is Rebbi Isaac (Nappaḥa), Amora of the second generation. His formula is quoted in the Babli (37a) for cooked cereal but without the final doxology. [Current practice is to include the doxology without invoking the Name, cf. Tosaphot 37a, s. v. בורא.]: When Rebbi was eating meat or an egg he used to say: “Creator of many living things to sustain with them all living souls. Praise to You, Eternal, Life of the worlds.⁸²If the vocalization is חֵי הָעוֹלָמִים (rejected by Maimonides), the translation would be: “Eternally living.”

That is at the end. At the start? Rebbi Ḥaggai said: “Creator of kinds of living things.” Rebbi Yose objected, does not the Mishnah (6:4) disagree? “On vinegar, on locusts, and on fallen fruits he says: “By Whose word everything was created.” And is a locust not a living thing⁸³The Mishnah states explicitly that “on everything that is not growing from the earth one says ‘By Whose word everything was created.’ ” The mention of vinegar (soured wine) and fallen fruits is meant to show that even produce that has become almost worthless needs this benediction; (edible) locusts are a scourge and the emphasis is that nevertheless they need a benediction if roasted and eaten. Hence, the statement of Rebbi Ḥaggai has no justification. In Hebrew and Aramaic, “living” applies only to animals but not to plants.?

The statement of Rebbi Simeon the pious⁸⁴He requires a formal “benediction in the kind of three” for delicacies made from any kind of flour. We now return to the main topic after the digression about non-vegetable food. turns out like that of Rebbi⁸⁵He requires a final doxology from “Creator of many living things.” and both of them like Rabban Gamliel⁸⁶The second statement of his is in Tosephta Berakhot 4:7. The first part of this Tosephta is quoted in Babli 37a., as it was stated: “The following is the principle: Rebbi Yehudah said in the name of Rabban Gamliel that on everything that is of the Seven Kinds but is not flour, or flour⁸⁷Including grain flour that is not enumerated in the verse, e. g., rye and spelt. but not baked as bread, Rabban Gamliel says that he recites afterwards three benedictions; but the Sages say, one benediction. On everything that is neither from the Seven Kinds nor a kind of flour, Rabban Gamliel says he recites benedictions before and after, but the sages say before, but not after⁸⁸Meaning “Creator of all kinds of living things” without the final doxology; it is not considered a formal benediction. Rebbi Simeon the Pious and Rebbi follow Rabban Gamliel who in this case does not spell out which benediction he requires at the end..”

Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Everything that is cereal and like dough put in boiling water and is of the Five Kinds⁸⁹The five kinds of flour that are admissible for matzot on Passover because they can become sour: Wheat, barley, oats, rye, and spelt. Only these produce bread that needs full Grace and pastries that need “one benediction imitating three (or, in our text today, four) benedictions,” i. e., its text contains one sentence each for each benediction of full Grace., over it one says “Creator of kinds of foods”, and one recites after it one benediction imitating three. And everything that is cereal and like dough put in boiling water, but is not of the Five Kinds, Rebbi Jonah said that Rebbi Zeïra sent to those of the Yeshivah of Rebbi Yannai⁹⁰Still existing two generations after the death of Rebbi Yannai. and they told him, but I do not know what they told him. What is it? Rebbi Yose said, it is reasonable to assume “That everything was created by His word.⁹¹The catch-all for all food not covered by anything else and that will allow one to eat all foods.” Rebbi Jeremiah inquired: He who ate cereal, what does he recite at the end⁹³“One benediction imitating three” or “Creator of many living things.”? Rebbi Yose said, and therefore Rebbi Jeremiah never ate any cereal⁹⁴Except in a meal that was covered by the benediction over bread at the start and Grace afterwards.. That is the only one thing about which he was in doubt⁹⁵צורכא, a technical expression, frequent in the Yerushalmi in this sense, and difficult to translate verbally..

Why does one finish⁹⁶The “benediction imitating three” is recited for wine, the Seven Fruits, and baked goods other than bread. That benediction first gives praise for the food, then for the Land of Israel, then prays for the rebuilding of Jerusalem (and adds a sentence for the Rabbinic fourth benediction of Grace, praising God as source of all good.) The question is why only the first two themes are repeated at the end since the final doxology reads in all cases: “Praise to You, Eternal, for the Land and … (here the specific food is named).” with “the Land”? It is similar to Grace for day laborers. As has been stated⁹⁷Tosephta Berakhot 5:24, Babli 16a. Day laborers who are paid by the hour and whose lunch break counts as worked time have the obligation to spend as little time as possible on their lunch and, in any case, their worship of God should not be paid by the employer except for the legal minimum.: “Workers who were doing work with the owner shall recite the first benediction, include Jerusalem in the benediction for the Land and finish with ‘the Land.’ But if they were working for their food⁹⁸Without any cash payments the employer is legally required to give them time for full standard Grace. or if the employer was eating with them, then they recite four benedictions.” In the school of Rebbi Yannai they treated it as a formula of benediction⁹⁹They formulated the fixed “benediction imitating three” and did not tolerate any deviation..

Does one have to mention in it the occasion¹⁰⁰Does one have to mention the Sabbath, holidays, and the days of the New Moon in the “benediction imitating three”?? Rebbi Abba bar Zamina said that Rebbi Zeïra used to mention the occasion in it. Rebbi Jeremiah said: Since Rebbi Zeïra took notice of it, so we have to take notice¹⁰¹Hence, one has to mention Sabbath and holidays. (This was adopted as formal practice by Maimonides from the Yerushalmi, cf. Babli 39a, Tosaphot s. v. על העץ)..

It has been stated¹⁰²Tosephta Berakhot 4:15; a small part of it is quoted in Babli 39b as statement of Amoraïm. The problem is that only the first bread of a meal needs a benediction; all other foods of that meal can then be eaten without additional benedictions. The food that is chosen for benediction should be distinguished.: “One recites the benediction on the better kind of flour. Rolls¹⁰³Greek, singular κόλλιξ, “roll”. and a full home baked loaf, one recites over a roll. A broken roll and a full home baked loaf, one recites on the full home baked loaf. Wheat bread and barley bread, one recites on wheat bread. A broken loaf of wheat bread and a full loaf of barley bread, one recites on the broken wheat bread. Barley bread and spelt bread, one recites on barley bread. But is not spelt bread better? But this is from one of the Seven Kinds, that one is not of the Seven Kinds.” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This is from Rebbi Yehudah, since Rebbi Yehudah said (Mishnah 4), “if there is¹⁰⁴On a fruit plate; one has to choose one fruit to eat first for a benediction, on the strength of which one may then eat all other fruits without additional benediction. The sages opposing Rebbi Yehudah assert that one makes the benediction over the fruit (or here, bread) one prefers, to let God’s praise come from a full heart. The Babli in practice follows the Sages but the Yerushalmi follows Rebbi Yehudah. among them a fruit of the Seven Kinds, on it he recites the benediction.” Impure bread and pure bread, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, he recites on the pure one¹⁰⁵In the time of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, this was a theoretical question only, since at that time nobody was free from the impurity associated with the dead. It must be assumed that the food in question is secular and impure by transfer from something that is the source of impurity; in that case, it cannot pollute the person who touches and eats it with due care.. Impure white bread and pure coarse¹⁰⁶Levy declares it to be from Greek κυρηβία, τά (plur.) “bran, shells of grain kernels,” Krauss and Löw from cibarius(panis) “coarse bread.” bread, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: He may recite on the one that he prefers¹⁰⁷Since each one has good and bad qualities..

Young palm shoots. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel: He recites on it “Creator of the fruit of the tree¹⁰⁸In the Babli (36a), the opinion of Rav Yehudah, accepted by his teacher Samuel, is to say “Creator of the fruit of the earth” since it is a vegetable growth but cannot qualify as “fruit” of the tree, since it will turn into inedible wood..” Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Saul stated, “By Whose word everything was created¹⁰⁹This is the original opinion of Samuel in the Babli, since nobody grows date palms for the few shoots one can eat each spring. Hence, it does not qualify as “fruit” of anything..” Rebbi Joshua stated: “Creator of kinds of grasses.¹¹⁰This is the only genuinly old tradition quoted, but it is rejected even by the Yerushalmi which admits a variety of formulas of benedictions, since young palm shoots cannot qualify as grasses. As the following list shows, thistles and thorny plants may qualify as grasses.
While it is clear that in the Babli קורא means “heart of the palm”, in the statement of R. Joshua the word might refer to Arabic קֻרַּה “cardamine, meadow cress”” The baraita of Rebbi Oshaiah disagrees: “The following are the kinds of grasses: artichoke¹¹¹Greek κυνάρα, κινάρα., ḥalimah¹¹²This plant is defined by Arukh, the talmudic dictionary of 11th cent. R. Nathan of Rome, as mallow or okra. However, the Syriac dictionaries define the word as equivalent of Latin anchusa, “ox tongue”., demua¹¹³An otherwise unknown grassy plant; the corresponding Arabic word دماع is explained in classical Arabic dictionaries as “seemingly the name of a plant.”, and lycium¹¹⁴A spiny plant frequent in the Jordan valley..