Talmud Yerushalmi
Yerushalmi Berakhot 7:1 ירושלמי ברכות ז׳:א׳
Part of: Chapter 7
Reading: Hebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlyHebrew · Simple EnglishHebrew · Faithful translationHebrew onlySimple English onlyFaithful translation onlySide by side
משנה: שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת חַיָיבִין לְזַמֵּן. אָכַל דְּמַאי וּמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁנִּיטְּלָה תְרוּמָתוֹ וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁנִּיפְדּוּ וְהַשַּׁמָּשׁ שֶׁאָכַל כְּזַיִת וְהַכּוּתִי מְזַמְּנִין עֲלֵיהֶן. אֲבָל אִם אָכַל טֵבֵל וּמַעֲשֵׂר רִאשׁוֹן שֶׁלֹּא נִיטְּלָה תְרוּמָתוֹ וּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי וְהֶקְדֵּשׁ שֶׁלֹּא נִיפְדּוּ וְהַשַּׁמָּשׁ שֶׁאָכַל פָּחוֹת מִכְּזַיִת וְהַנָּכְרִי אֵין מְזַמְּנִין עֲלֵיהֶן.
MISHNAH: Three persons who ate together are required to “invite”1Three adult males who ate together are obliged to recite Grace as a group and start with a special invitation to all participants to join in the praise of the Lord by Whose kindness we live. The text of the “invitation” is given in Mishnah 3.. If one ate demai2Newly harvested produce is subject to several obligatory gifts and tithes. The first one is the heave, תְּרוּמָה, that can be given to any Cohen. This terumah must be eaten by a Cohen’s family in ritual purity. There is no rate set for terumah in the Torah but in times when ritual purity can be observed, the rabbinically established rate was 2 percent. Next, the tithe of 10% must be given to a Levite. This maäser again is subject to a 10% terumah of the tithe to be given to the Cohen. The remainder of this first tithe is secular private property of the Levite and need not be kept in purity. However, consumption by a non-Cohen of any food containing still terumah (and of impure terumah by a Cohen) is a deadly sin. In Temple times it was established that all Jews, educated and uneducated, observant and nonobservant alike, did separate terumah and give it to a Cohen. However, the first tithe was not given by a substantial minority of uneducated and nonobservant. Since untithed produce still contains the terumah of the tithe and its consumption would be a deadly sin, it was instituted that observant Jews have to separate at least the terumah of the tithe for produce bought from unreliable sources. Since a majority of all agricultural producers did give the tithe, the obligation to tithe is conditional and is waved for the poor. Produce sold by unreliable persons is called demai; the rules under which demai has to be given are spelled out in a separate Tractate. In any case, since any person might give away all his property and then become poor and eat demai without tithing, demai is potentially permitted food for everybody and the person who eats it does not commit blasphemy in reciting Grace., or first tithe of which the heave was taken3The Babli explains, even if the heave was taken somewhat irregularly. There is no mention of that in the Yerushalmi., or second tithe4The second tithe remains the property of the farmer but either it must be eaten in Jerusalem or it must be redeemed and the proceeds taken to Jerusalem and spent there for food. Second tithe that was redeemed is normal food permitted to everybody. or dedicated foods5This is food from an animal not of the kind that may be sacrificed, or vegetables that may not be sacrificed, but were given to support the upkeep of the Temple. These gifts are then sold and the money used for the Temple. After the sale, the food is profane, for everybody to eat. Also, an animal dedicated for the altar that develops a blemish before it is sacrificed, can be redeemed and then becomes secular food which, however, must be consumed in a dignified manner. that were redeemed, or the waiter who ate the volume of an olive6Nobody may recite Grace who did not eat at least food of the volume of an average olive. The waiter is acceptable even though he did not sit down with the guests he served., or a Samaritan7The descendants of the people settled in Samaria by the king of Assyria (2Kings 17) who accepted the written Torah but not the oral law. [Since they did not resist the effort made by Diocletian to unify the Roman Empire in pagan rite, this statement of the Mishnah no longer applies. It does apply, however, to Karaites.], these can be invited. But if one ate untithed produce, or first tithe of which the heave was not taken, or the second tithe8Outside of Jerusalem. or dedicated foods that were not redeemed9Except for the second tithe, the consumption of the foods mentioned here is a deadly sin; hence, pronouncing a benediction over that food would be the additional sin of blasphemy., or the waiter who ate less than the volume of an olive, or a Gentile10He is not obliged to recite Grace and has no part in the Land for which we give praise., these cannot be invited.
MISHNAH: Three persons who ate together are required to “invite”1Three adult males who ate together are obliged to recite Grace as a group and start with a special invitation to all participants to join in the praise of the Lord by Whose kindness we live. The text of the “invitation” is given in Mishnah 3.. If one ate demai2Newly harvested produce is subject to several obligatory gifts and tithes. The first one is the heave, תְּרוּמָה, that can be given to any Cohen. This terumah must be eaten by a Cohen’s family in ritual purity. There is no rate set for terumah in the Torah but in times when ritual purity can be observed, the rabbinically established rate was 2 percent. Next, the tithe of 10% must be given to a Levite. This maäser again is subject to a 10% terumah of the tithe to be given to the Cohen. The remainder of this first tithe is secular private property of the Levite and need not be kept in purity. However, consumption by a non-Cohen of any food containing still terumah (and of impure terumah by a Cohen) is a deadly sin. In Temple times it was established that all Jews, educated and uneducated, observant and nonobservant alike, did separate terumah and give it to a Cohen. However, the first tithe was not given by a substantial minority of uneducated and nonobservant. Since untithed produce still contains the terumah of the tithe and its consumption would be a deadly sin, it was instituted that observant Jews have to separate at least the terumah of the tithe for produce bought from unreliable sources. Since a majority of all agricultural producers did give the tithe, the obligation to tithe is conditional and is waved for the poor. Produce sold by unreliable persons is called demai; the rules under which demai has to be given are spelled out in a separate Tractate. In any case, since any person might give away all his property and then become poor and eat demai without tithing, demai is potentially permitted food for everybody and the person who eats it does not commit blasphemy in reciting Grace., or first tithe of which the heave was taken3The Babli explains, even if the heave was taken somewhat irregularly. There is no mention of that in the Yerushalmi., or second tithe4The second tithe remains the property of the farmer but either it must be eaten in Jerusalem or it must be redeemed and the proceeds taken to Jerusalem and spent there for food. Second tithe that was redeemed is normal food permitted to everybody. or dedicated foods5This is food from an animal not of the kind that may be sacrificed, or vegetables that may not be sacrificed, but were given to support the upkeep of the Temple. These gifts are then sold and the money used for the Temple. After the sale, the food is profane, for everybody to eat. Also, an animal dedicated for the altar that develops a blemish before it is sacrificed, can be redeemed and then becomes secular food which, however, must be consumed in a dignified manner. that were redeemed, or the waiter who ate the volume of an olive6Nobody may recite Grace who did not eat at least food of the volume of an average olive. The waiter is acceptable even though he did not sit down with the guests he served., or a Samaritan7The descendants of the people settled in Samaria by the king of Assyria (2Kings 17) who accepted the written Torah but not the oral law. [Since they did not resist the effort made by Diocletian to unify the Roman Empire in pagan rite, this statement of the Mishnah no longer applies. It does apply, however, to Karaites.], these can be invited. But if one ate untithed produce, or first tithe of which the heave was not taken, or the second tithe8Outside of Jerusalem. or dedicated foods that were not redeemed9Except for the second tithe, the consumption of the foods mentioned here is a deadly sin; hence, pronouncing a benediction over that food would be the additional sin of blasphemy., or the waiter who ate less than the volume of an olive, or a Gentile10He is not obliged to recite Grace and has no part in the Land for which we give praise., these cannot be invited.
הלכה: הָכָא אִיתְמַר אֵין רְשָׁאִין לְחַלֵּק. וָכָה אִיתְמַר חַיַָיבִין לְזַמֵּן. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר כַּאן בִּתְחִילָּה כַּאן בְּסוֹף. אֵי זֶהוּ בִּתְחִילָּה וְאֵי זֶהוּ בְּסוֹף. תְּרֵין אֲמוֹרָיִן חַד אָמַר נָתְנוּ דַּעַת לֶאֱכוֹל זֶהוּ בִּתְחִילָּה. אָכְלוּ כְזַיִת זֶהוּ בְּסוֹף. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר אָכְלוּ כְזַיִת זֶהוּ בִּתְחִילָּה. גָּמְרוּ אֲכִילָתָן זֶהוּ בְּסוֹף.
HALAKHAH: Here11Mishnah 5: Three who ate together are not allowed to split. [There the emphasis is on the fact that six people who ate together may split into two groups of three.] The Yerushalmi is discussed at length by Tosaphot Berakhot 45a and Talmid Rabbenu Jonah,Rosh on Mishnah 5. it has been said “they are not allowed to split” and here it has been said “they are required to ‘invite’ ”12The two Mishnayot seem to say the same thing, so one of them would be superfluous.. Samuel said, one is at the start and one is at the end. What means “beginning” and what means “end”? Two Amoraïm; one said if they decided to eat together that is the start13They are no longer allowed to split., when they ate the volume of an olive that is the end14They are required to recite Grace together with the formal “invitation.”. But the other one said, if they ate the volume of an olive that is the start15They are no longer allowed to eat each one for himself., when they finished their meal that is the end16They must recite Grace together; if one of them finishes early he is not allowed to recite Grace for himself and then leave..
HALAKHAH: Here11Mishnah 5: Three who ate together are not allowed to split. [There the emphasis is on the fact that six people who ate together may split into two groups of three.] The Yerushalmi is discussed at length by Tosaphot Berakhot 45a and Talmid Rabbenu Jonah,Rosh on Mishnah 5. it has been said “they are not allowed to split” and here it has been said “they are required to ‘invite’ ”12The two Mishnayot seem to say the same thing, so one of them would be superfluous.. Samuel said, one is at the start and one is at the end. What means “beginning” and what means “end”? Two Amoraïm; one said if they decided to eat together that is the start13They are no longer allowed to split., when they ate the volume of an olive that is the end14They are required to recite Grace together with the formal “invitation.”. But the other one said, if they ate the volume of an olive that is the start15They are no longer allowed to eat each one for himself., when they finished their meal that is the end16They must recite Grace together; if one of them finishes early he is not allowed to recite Grace for himself and then leave..
רִבִּי אַבָּא בְּשֵׁם רַב חוּנָא רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְּשֵׁם אַבָּא בַּר יִרְמְיָה שְׁלֹשָׁה חוֹבָה שְׁנַיִם רְשׁוּת. אָמְרָהּ רִבִּי זְעִירָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי יָסָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ אֲנִי אֵין לִי אֶלָּא מִשְׁנָה שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת חַיָיבִין לְזַמֵּן. רַבָּנָן דְּהָכָא כְּדַעְתּוֹן. וְרַבָּנָן דְּהָתָם כְּדַעְתּוֹן. שְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר שְׁנַיִם שֶׁדָּנוּ דִּינָן דִּין אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא נִקְרָא בֵּית דִּין חָצוּף. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ תְּרַוֵּיהוֹן אָמְרִין אֲפִילוּ שְׁנַיִם שֶׁדָּנוּ אֵין דִּינָן דִּין.
Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Huna, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Abba bar Jeremiah: Three are required, two have permission. Rebbi Zeïra said this before Rebbi Yasa. He said to him: I have only the Mishnah, three who ate together are required to “invite”17But two may not recite Grace together with the formula of invitation. The Babli (45a/b) comes to the same conclusion that the old tradition of Babylonia was that two may say Grace together but three must do it, but the Israeli tradition was always to exclude two if three are required.. The rabbis of here stick by their opinion, the rabbis of there18Babylonia. The disagreement between Samuel and R. Yoḥanan / R. Simeon ben Laqish belongs to tractate Sanhedrin; in Babli Sanhedrin (5b/6a) this is a disagreement between Samuel and Rebbi Abbahu, student of R. Simeon ben Laqish and R. Yoḥanan. The Babli (Berakhot 45b) only hints that the difference has its roots in different local traditions. stick by their opinion. Samuel said, two who judged, their judgment is valid but they are called an insolent court. Rebbi Yoḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, two who judged, their judgment is invalid.
Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Huna, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Abba bar Jeremiah: Three are required, two have permission. Rebbi Zeïra said this before Rebbi Yasa. He said to him: I have only the Mishnah, three who ate together are required to “invite”17But two may not recite Grace together with the formula of invitation. The Babli (45a/b) comes to the same conclusion that the old tradition of Babylonia was that two may say Grace together but three must do it, but the Israeli tradition was always to exclude two if three are required.. The rabbis of here stick by their opinion, the rabbis of there18Babylonia. The disagreement between Samuel and R. Yoḥanan / R. Simeon ben Laqish belongs to tractate Sanhedrin; in Babli Sanhedrin (5b/6a) this is a disagreement between Samuel and Rebbi Abbahu, student of R. Simeon ben Laqish and R. Yoḥanan. The Babli (Berakhot 45b) only hints that the difference has its roots in different local traditions. stick by their opinion. Samuel said, two who judged, their judgment is valid but they are called an insolent court. Rebbi Yoḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both say, two who judged, their judgment is invalid.
רַב חוּנָא אָמַר שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְנִתְעָרְבוּ מְזַמְּנִין. רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר וְהֵן שֶׁבָּאוּ מִשָּׁלֹשׁ חֲבוּרוֹת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי זֵירָא וַחֲבוּרָתֵיהּ וְהֵן שֶׁאָכְלוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה כְּאַחַת. רִבִּי יוֹנָה עַל הֲדָא דְּרַב חוּנָא הִטְבִּיל שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵיזוֹבוֹת זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְנִתְעָרְבוּ מַזֶּה בָהֶן. רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר וְהֵן שֶׁבָּאוּ מִשָּׁלֹשׁ חֲבִילוֹת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי זְעִירָא וַחֲבוּרָתֵהּ וְהוּא שֶׁהִטְבִּיל שְׁלָשְׁתָּן כְּאַחַת. אִין תֵּימַר אֵין לְמֵידִין אֵזוֹב מִבְּרָכָה. וַאֲנָן חֲזִינָן רַבָּנָן קַיָימִין בְּסוּכָּה וְיַלְפִין מִטִּיט הַנָּרוּק. כְּיַי דְתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן הִרְחִיק אֶת הַסִּיכּוּךְ מִן הַדְּפָנוֹת שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים פְּסוּלָה. הָא פָּחוֹת מִיכַּן כְּשֵׁירָה. מַהוּ לִישָׁן תַּחְתָּיו. הָתִיב רִבִּי יִצְחָק בֶּן אֶלְיָשִׁיב הֲרֵי טִיט הַנָּרוּק מַשְׁלִים בְּמִקְוֶה וְאֵין מַטְבִּילִין בּוֹ. אַף הָכָא מַשְׁלִים בְּסוּכָּה וְאֵין יְשֵׁינִין תַּחְתָּיו.
Rav Huna said, three who ate each one by himself19Different food at different tables, or at one table but they are strangers to one another and each one eats his own food that he brought with him. The disagreement between Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda is explained differently in the Babli, 50a. and then came together20At one table (or on one group of couches) befor they recited Grace. do “invite”. Rav Ḥisda said, only if they came from three groups21Every one of the three was required to recite Grace with “invitation”; he may fulfill his obligation even in another group. But if three people were not obligated to “invite” during their meal they cannot become subject to “inviting” after they had finished eating.. According to the opinion of Rebbi Zeïra22Here he is called by his Babylonian name זירא since, under the influence of Accadic, the Jews in Babylonia early on had lost the sound of ע. While his Israeli name appears in the list of R. Jonah, the entire piece seems to have had a Babylonian editor; so it uses the Babylonian Aramaic חזי “to see” instead of the usual Israeli חמי. and his group, only if all three ate together23From the start. (In the Babli, 50a, this is the opinion of Samuel, but here it is the opinion only of the rabbis in Israel). Connected with this is the Tosephta (Berakhot 5:23, cf. end of Halakhah 5) that people in a caravan, if they eat while walking, cannot recite Grace together even if they all ate from the same food, but if they sit together at a rest stop, they must recite Grace together even if everyone ate his own provisions. In contrast to the Babli, the Yerushalmi never entertains the thought that for common Grace one would have to lie down on couches.. Rebbi Jonah on that of Rav Huna: If he dipped three stalks of hyssop each one by himself and then took them together, he may sprinkle with it24Used for cleansing a person or utensils impure by contact with a corpse; cleansing needs sprinkling with a bunch of hyssop that was dipped in water in which some of the ashes of a red heifer were dissolved (Num. 19, Mishnah Parah). A “bunch” is a minimum of three stalks. The opinions here are attributed to the older authorities by Rebbi Jonah.. Rav Ḥisda said, only if they came from three bundles. According to the opinion of Rebbi Zeïra and his group, only if all three were dipped together. If you want to say that we do not infer rules of hyssop from rules of benedictions, do we not see the rabbis deal with sukkah and learn from pourable mud?25This proof that one requires logical consistency even in fields that are rather remote from each other is also a belated justification of the previous comparison of the rules of Grace with the composition of a court of law.. As we have stated (Mishnah Sukkah 1:10): “If the roofing was three hand-breadths away from the walls it is invalid.26The essence of the sukkah is that its roof must be botanical (but only materials that cannot become ritually unclean). The branches or other material must be arranged so that there is more shadow than sun inside the sukkah. If there is a place where that condition is not satisfied for three hand-breadths horizontally from a wall, the sukkah cannot be used to fulfill the commandment “to dwell” in it (Lev. 23:42).” Hence less than that is acceptable. May one sleep under that27The place, less than two hand-breadths wide, under which there is more sun than shadow. Instead of sleeping, the question could have been asked about eating.? Rebbi Isaac ben Elyashib28An Israeli Amora of the fourth generation, colleague of Rebbi Mana; a holy man and worker of miracles. answered, pourable mud completes a miqweh29A ritual bath can be used for cleansing impurities only if it contains 40 seäh, about 135 gallons. If there is not enough clear water, the desired volume can be obtained by adding mud that is so moist that it can be poured from a bucket (Mishnah Miqwaöt 7:1). The complete argument is in Yerushalmi Sukkah 1:10, Babli Sukkah 19a. but one may not immerse in it, here also it completes the sukkah but one may not sleep under it.
Rav Huna said, three who ate each one by himself19Different food at different tables, or at one table but they are strangers to one another and each one eats his own food that he brought with him. The disagreement between Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda is explained differently in the Babli, 50a. and then came together20At one table (or on one group of couches) befor they recited Grace. do “invite”. Rav Ḥisda said, only if they came from three groups21Every one of the three was required to recite Grace with “invitation”; he may fulfill his obligation even in another group. But if three people were not obligated to “invite” during their meal they cannot become subject to “inviting” after they had finished eating.. According to the opinion of Rebbi Zeïra22Here he is called by his Babylonian name זירא since, under the influence of Accadic, the Jews in Babylonia early on had lost the sound of ע. While his Israeli name appears in the list of R. Jonah, the entire piece seems to have had a Babylonian editor; so it uses the Babylonian Aramaic חזי “to see” instead of the usual Israeli חמי. and his group, only if all three ate together23From the start. (In the Babli, 50a, this is the opinion of Samuel, but here it is the opinion only of the rabbis in Israel). Connected with this is the Tosephta (Berakhot 5:23, cf. end of Halakhah 5) that people in a caravan, if they eat while walking, cannot recite Grace together even if they all ate from the same food, but if they sit together at a rest stop, they must recite Grace together even if everyone ate his own provisions. In contrast to the Babli, the Yerushalmi never entertains the thought that for common Grace one would have to lie down on couches.. Rebbi Jonah on that of Rav Huna: If he dipped three stalks of hyssop each one by himself and then took them together, he may sprinkle with it24Used for cleansing a person or utensils impure by contact with a corpse; cleansing needs sprinkling with a bunch of hyssop that was dipped in water in which some of the ashes of a red heifer were dissolved (Num. 19, Mishnah Parah). A “bunch” is a minimum of three stalks. The opinions here are attributed to the older authorities by Rebbi Jonah.. Rav Ḥisda said, only if they came from three bundles. According to the opinion of Rebbi Zeïra and his group, only if all three were dipped together. If you want to say that we do not infer rules of hyssop from rules of benedictions, do we not see the rabbis deal with sukkah and learn from pourable mud?25This proof that one requires logical consistency even in fields that are rather remote from each other is also a belated justification of the previous comparison of the rules of Grace with the composition of a court of law.. As we have stated (Mishnah Sukkah 1:10): “If the roofing was three hand-breadths away from the walls it is invalid.26The essence of the sukkah is that its roof must be botanical (but only materials that cannot become ritually unclean). The branches or other material must be arranged so that there is more shadow than sun inside the sukkah. If there is a place where that condition is not satisfied for three hand-breadths horizontally from a wall, the sukkah cannot be used to fulfill the commandment “to dwell” in it (Lev. 23:42).” Hence less than that is acceptable. May one sleep under that27The place, less than two hand-breadths wide, under which there is more sun than shadow. Instead of sleeping, the question could have been asked about eating.? Rebbi Isaac ben Elyashib28An Israeli Amora of the fourth generation, colleague of Rebbi Mana; a holy man and worker of miracles. answered, pourable mud completes a miqweh29A ritual bath can be used for cleansing impurities only if it contains 40 seäh, about 135 gallons. If there is not enough clear water, the desired volume can be obtained by adding mud that is so moist that it can be poured from a bucket (Mishnah Miqwaöt 7:1). The complete argument is in Yerushalmi Sukkah 1:10, Babli Sukkah 19a. but one may not immerse in it, here also it completes the sukkah but one may not sleep under it.
שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת וּבִיקֵּשׁ אֶחָד מֵהֶן לֵילֵךְ לוֹ דְּבֵית רַב אָמַרֵי יְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה וְיֵלֶךְ לוֹ. אֵי זוּ הִיא בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. דְּבֵית רַב אָמְרֵי זוּ בִּרְכַּת הַזִּימּוּן. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רַב יִרְמְיָה זוּ הַזָּן אֶת הַכֹּל. רִבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ [רַב] חָנָן בְּשֵׁם רַב זוּ הַזָּן אֶת הַכֹּל. הָתִיב רַב שֵׁשֶׁת וְהָא מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא שְׁנַיִם שְׁלֹשָׁה חַיָיבִין בְּבִרְכַת הַזִּימּוּן. הָא אַרְבָּעָה לֹא. אִין תֵּימַר בִּרְכַּת זִימוּן רִאשׁוֹנָה נִיתְנֵי אַרְבָּעָה. אַשְׁכְּחָן תַּנִּי אַרְבָּעָה. אִין תֵּימַר זוּ הַזָּן אֶת הַכֹּל קַשְׁיָא. אִין תֵּימַר זוּ הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב. לֵית אַתְּ יָכִיל. שַׁנְיָיא הִיא דְּאָמַר רַב חוּנָא מִשֶּׁנִּיתְּנוּ הֲרוּגֵי בֵיתָר לִקְבוּרָה נִקְבְּעָה הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב. הַטּוֹב שֶׁלֹּא נִסְרְחוּ וְהַמֵּטִיב שֶׁנִּיתְּנוּ לִקְבוּרָה. אָמַר רַב חוּנָה תִּיפְתָּר כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעְאֵל דְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָמַר הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב דְּבַר תּוֹרָה דִּכְתִיב וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ וּבֵרַכְתָּ זוּ בִּרְכַּת הַזִּימּוּן. אֶת יי אֱלֹהֶיךָ זוּ הַזָּן אֶת הַכֹּל. עַל הָאָרֶץ זוּ בִּרְכַּת הָאָרֶץ. הַטּוֹבָה זוּ בִּרְכַּת בּוֹנֵה יְרוּשָׁלַםִ. וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר הָהָר הַטּוֹב הַזֶּה וְהַלְּבָנוֹן. אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָךְ זֶה הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב.
Three who ate together and one wants to leave, Rav said he should recite the first benediction, then he may leave. What is the first benediction? In the Yeshivah of Rav30After Rav’s death. they said, the benediction of invitation. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Jeremiah: that is “He Who feeds all.”31The first benediction of Grace when recited without “invitation”. It seems that Rebbi Zeïra also agrees that the one who wants to leave has to recite the benediction “of invitation” aloud so that the other two may answer and fulfill their duty to recite Grace with “invitation”; the disagreement is only about how much he has to recite aloud, whether only the “invitation” or also the first benediction of Grace proper. [If all three recite Grace together, the one who recites the “invitation” has to recite all of Grace aloud; this custom has disappeared in Eastern European Ashkenazic Jewry after the invention of printing and the availability of inexpensive prayer books for everyone.] Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Ḥanan in the name of Rav: that is “He Who feeds all.” Rav Sheshet objected, but a baraita disagrees: “Two, three are obliged to recite Grace.32It is generally agreed that ברכת הזימון is a scribal error and that the correct reading is that of Alfassi ברכת המזון “Grace”. The explanation of the elliptic baraita is according to Alfassi: If two or three people sit together and neither of them knows how to recite the entire Grace but each of them knows one or two benedictions that the others do not, then they take turns in reciting the benedictions and they all have fulfilled their obligations, the one reciting by pronouncing the benediction and the others by listening and answering “Amen”. The numbers are important to show that we require one person to recite an entire benediction; it is not permissible to split one benediction among several people. Hence, the maximal number of people who can share in reciting Grace is the number of benedictions in Grace.” If you want to say the benediction of invitation is the first one, one should state “four.” They found stated “four.” If you want to say this is “He Who feeds all”, it is difficult. If you want to say that it33The fourth benediction according to him who requires the first benediction to include “He Who feeds all.” is “He Who is good and does good”, you cannot do that, there is a difference34Between the first three benedictions that are Torah obligations and the fourth one who seems to be Rabbinic in character. because Rav Huna said that “He Who is good and does good” was fixed35It says “fixed”, not “instituted” as in the parallel in the Babli (48b). According to the Yerushalmi, the fourth benediction is old, probably Biblical, but it was not permanently required in earlier times; the problem is discussed in the author’s The Scholar’s Haggadah (Northvale NJ, 1995) p. 358–359. after permission was received to bury the slain of Betar36Roman law did not allow the burial of rebels against the government. Hence, the dead of Betar, the last of Bar Kokhba’s fortresses, could certainly not be buried during Hadrian’s lifetime. It is not known which of his successors gave permission to bury the dead. We may assume that it was the same emperor who permitted the re-establishment of the Synhedrion., “He Who is good” because the dead did not decompose and “He Who does good” that they could be buried. Rav Huna said, you may explain it following Rebbi Ismael since Rebbi Ismael said37Mekhilta deR. Ismael Ba 16., “He Who is good and does good” is an obligation from the Torah as it is written (Deut.8:10): You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise, that is the benediction of invitation; the Eternal, your God, that is “He Who feeds all”38Since the name “God” represents God as Creator of the physical world.; for the Land, that is the benediction over the Land; the good one, that is the benediction “builder of Jerusalem” [and so it says (Deut. 3:25) “this good mountain and the Lebanon39“Lebanon” means the Temple; this identification goes back at least to the time of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai who predicted to Vespasian that he would become emperor, since he would destroy the Temple and it is written (Is. 10:34) “the Lebanon will fall through a powerful one” (Babli Giṭṭin 56b; Yerushalmi sources: Abot deR. Nathan 4, Midrash Ekha rabba 1).”]; that He gave you, that is “He Who is good and does good”.
Three who ate together and one wants to leave, Rav said he should recite the first benediction, then he may leave. What is the first benediction? In the Yeshivah of Rav30After Rav’s death. they said, the benediction of invitation. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Jeremiah: that is “He Who feeds all.”31The first benediction of Grace when recited without “invitation”. It seems that Rebbi Zeïra also agrees that the one who wants to leave has to recite the benediction “of invitation” aloud so that the other two may answer and fulfill their duty to recite Grace with “invitation”; the disagreement is only about how much he has to recite aloud, whether only the “invitation” or also the first benediction of Grace proper. [If all three recite Grace together, the one who recites the “invitation” has to recite all of Grace aloud; this custom has disappeared in Eastern European Ashkenazic Jewry after the invention of printing and the availability of inexpensive prayer books for everyone.] Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Ḥanan in the name of Rav: that is “He Who feeds all.” Rav Sheshet objected, but a baraita disagrees: “Two, three are obliged to recite Grace.32It is generally agreed that ברכת הזימון is a scribal error and that the correct reading is that of Alfassi ברכת המזון “Grace”. The explanation of the elliptic baraita is according to Alfassi: If two or three people sit together and neither of them knows how to recite the entire Grace but each of them knows one or two benedictions that the others do not, then they take turns in reciting the benedictions and they all have fulfilled their obligations, the one reciting by pronouncing the benediction and the others by listening and answering “Amen”. The numbers are important to show that we require one person to recite an entire benediction; it is not permissible to split one benediction among several people. Hence, the maximal number of people who can share in reciting Grace is the number of benedictions in Grace.” If you want to say the benediction of invitation is the first one, one should state “four.” They found stated “four.” If you want to say this is “He Who feeds all”, it is difficult. If you want to say that it33The fourth benediction according to him who requires the first benediction to include “He Who feeds all.” is “He Who is good and does good”, you cannot do that, there is a difference34Between the first three benedictions that are Torah obligations and the fourth one who seems to be Rabbinic in character. because Rav Huna said that “He Who is good and does good” was fixed35It says “fixed”, not “instituted” as in the parallel in the Babli (48b). According to the Yerushalmi, the fourth benediction is old, probably Biblical, but it was not permanently required in earlier times; the problem is discussed in the author’s The Scholar’s Haggadah (Northvale NJ, 1995) p. 358–359. after permission was received to bury the slain of Betar36Roman law did not allow the burial of rebels against the government. Hence, the dead of Betar, the last of Bar Kokhba’s fortresses, could certainly not be buried during Hadrian’s lifetime. It is not known which of his successors gave permission to bury the dead. We may assume that it was the same emperor who permitted the re-establishment of the Synhedrion., “He Who is good” because the dead did not decompose and “He Who does good” that they could be buried. Rav Huna said, you may explain it following Rebbi Ismael since Rebbi Ismael said37Mekhilta deR. Ismael Ba 16., “He Who is good and does good” is an obligation from the Torah as it is written (Deut.8:10): You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise, that is the benediction of invitation; the Eternal, your God, that is “He Who feeds all”38Since the name “God” represents God as Creator of the physical world.; for the Land, that is the benediction over the Land; the good one, that is the benediction “builder of Jerusalem” [and so it says (Deut. 3:25) “this good mountain and the Lebanon39“Lebanon” means the Temple; this identification goes back at least to the time of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai who predicted to Vespasian that he would become emperor, since he would destroy the Temple and it is written (Is. 10:34) “the Lebanon will fall through a powerful one” (Babli Giṭṭin 56b; Yerushalmi sources: Abot deR. Nathan 4, Midrash Ekha rabba 1).”]; that He gave you, that is “He Who is good and does good”.
כָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה בְּרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ וְאֵין כָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֶיהָ. מַה כָּתוּב בָּהּ לְפָנֶיהָ כִּי שֵׁם יי אֶקְרָא הָבוּ גּוֹדֶל לֶאלֹהֵינוּ. כְּתִיב בְּמָזוֹן בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרֶיהָ וְאֵין כָּתוּב לְפָנָיו. מַה כְּתִיב לְאַחֲרָיו וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ וּבֵרַכְתָּ. וּמְנַיִין לִיתֵּן אֶת הָאָמוּר בְּזֶה בְזֶה וְאֶת הָאָמוּר בְּזֶה בְזֶה. רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן אַתְיָא שֵׁם שֵׁם לִגְזֵרָה שָׁוָה. מַה שֵׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּתּוֹרָה בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו אַף שֵׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּמָזוֹן בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו. וּמַה שֵׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּמָזוֹן בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרָיו. אַף שֵׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּתּוֹרָה לְאַחֲרֶיהָ. עַד כְּדוֹן כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעְאֵל. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעְאֵל קַל וָחוֹמֶר. מַה אִם מָזוֹן שֶׁאֵין טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרָיו תּוֹרָה שֶׁהִיא טְעוּנָה בְּרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ. אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁתְּהֵא טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה לְאַחֲרֶיהָ. עַד כְּדוֹן תּוֹרָה. מָזוֹן מַה. אִם תּוֹרָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה לְאַחֲרֶיהָ טָעוּנָה בְּרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ. מָזוֹן שֶׁטָּעוּן בְּרָכָה לְאַחֲרָיו. אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁטָּעוּן בְרָכָה לְפָנָיו. רִבִּי יִצְחָק וְרִבִּי נָתָן. [רִבִּי יִצְחָק] אָמַר כִּי הוּא יְבָרֵךְ הַזֶּבַח וְאַחַר כָּךְ יֹאכְלוּ הַקְּרוּאִים. רִבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֶת יי אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וּבֵרַךְ אֶת לַחְמְךָ וְאֶת מֵימֶיךָ. אֵימָתַי הוּא קָרוּי לַחְמְךָ וְאֶת מֵימֶיךָ. עַד שֶׁלֹּא אָכַלְתָּ. רִבִּי אוֹמֵר מַה אִם בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָכַל וְשָׂבֵעַ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא תָאֵב לֶאֱכוֹל לֹא כָּל שְׁכֵּן. עַד כְּדוֹן מָזוֹן. תּוֹרָה מַה. אִם מָזוֹן שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֵלָּא חַיֵּי שָׁעָה טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. תּוֹרָה שֶׁהִיא חַיֵּי עַד לֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן.
For Torah40Torah study, including Torah reading. there is written a benediction before, but no benediction is written after. What is written before it? (Deut. 32:3) “For I am invoking the name of the Eternal, attribute greatness to our God.” For food there is written a benediction after, but no benediction is written before. What is written after it? (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise”. From where that which is said about one on the other and vice-versa? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: The Name is mentioned in both verses as parallel expressions41In general, it is assumed in the system of Rebbi Aqiba that a word can have only one meaning. A stronger implication, agreed to by all tannaïtic authorities, is a “parallel expression”. The formal definition of the school of R. Ismael is that if one has a tradition that two equal or synonymous expressions are written in the Torah for purposes of comparison and if these two words are not used for any other inference, then all laws connected with one word apply to the other and vice-versa. The derivation here does not fulfill these conditions; hence, it is labelled to follow the rules of R. Aqiba who is not known to require too much formality in case the verse is used to give a biblical base to an old tradition.. Just as the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction before, so the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction before. And just as the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction after, so the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction after. That follows Rebbi Aqiba42Who is an exponent of intensional interpretation, whereas R. Ismael is an exponent of extensional interpretation. The rules of R. Ismael are systematized in his “13 rules” given in the introduction to the halakhic Midrash Sifra on Leviticus. The problem of both Rebbi Aqiba and Rebbi Ismael is that in its mishnaic-talmudic form, the rules of Jewish conduct form a logically consistent whole. It was shown earlier in this chapter, Notes 24 – 29, that rules must be consistent from one application to the next, such as rules of Grace and forming a court of law. But the basis of these laws, the words of the Torah, are unsystematic, fragmentary, and sometimes appear contradictory. Hence, one needs a method of translating the aphoristic text of the Torah in a legally consistent new language; cf. the author’s Logical problems in Jewish tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. P. Longworth, Blond, London 1966, 171–196. The rules are discussed in the medieval texts Introduction to the Talmud by R. Samuel Hanaggid and Sefer Keritut of R. Simson of Sens.. What following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael, an inference from the lesser to the greater43קל וחוֹמר, the first rule of R. Ismael. If there are two commandments, A and B, and if every rule for A is no more stringent than the corresponding rule for B, then a rule expressed for A that has no equivalent for B is valid also for B. The Babli (21a) quotes the following qal waḥomer in the name of R. Yoḥanan only and points out that the application here is not justified since it is self-contradictory. The Yerushalmi seems to be of the opinion that in the formulation given here, with “not more stringent” instead of “less stringent”, the argument is logically admissible.. If food that needs no explicit benediction before, needs a benediction afterwards, regarding Torah that needs a benediction before, it is only logical that it should need a benediction afterwards. That works for Torah; what about food? If Torah that needs no benediction afterwards, needs a benediction before, regarding food that needs a benediction afterwards, it is only logical that it should need a benediction before. Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan say, (1Sam. 9:13): “For he will recite the benediction over the sacrifice and after that the invited guests will eat.”44In the Babli (48b) and in the Mekhilta (loc. cit.) this is given in the name of R. Nathan only. A verse from Samuel (Biblical but not Pentateuchal) cannot prove a commandment but can prove a practice. Rebbi Nathan45In the Babli and the Mekhilta, this appears in the name of Rebbi Isaac. said, (Ex. 23:24) “you shall serve the Eternal, your God and give praise for your bread and your water”; when is it called your bread and your water, before you eat46The full verse seems to read: “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, then He will bless your bread and your water and I will remove sickness from your midst.” The switch from third to first person is awkward in any case. In the Babli (in particular, in the Sephardic incunabula print) it is spelled out: Do not read וּבֵרַךְ “He will bless” but וּבָרֵךְ “and praise”. However, the Bible Concordance of G. Lisowsky (Stuttgart 1958) takes the verse, as it stands, to mean “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, and praise for your bread and your water, then I will remove sickness from your midst.” One may recite a benediction one one’s bread and one’s water only before it is consumed; afterwards one may speak only of nourishment and sustenance.. Rebbi said, if he has to give praise when he ate and is satiated, somuch more at a time when he is hungry for food. That is for food, what about Torah? If food, which sustains only temporary life, needs a benediction before and after, Torah, which sustains eternal life, so much more47In the Babli and the Mekhilta this is a קל וחוֹמר of Rebbi Ismael..
For Torah40Torah study, including Torah reading. there is written a benediction before, but no benediction is written after. What is written before it? (Deut. 32:3) “For I am invoking the name of the Eternal, attribute greatness to our God.” For food there is written a benediction after, but no benediction is written before. What is written after it? (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise”. From where that which is said about one on the other and vice-versa? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: The Name is mentioned in both verses as parallel expressions41In general, it is assumed in the system of Rebbi Aqiba that a word can have only one meaning. A stronger implication, agreed to by all tannaïtic authorities, is a “parallel expression”. The formal definition of the school of R. Ismael is that if one has a tradition that two equal or synonymous expressions are written in the Torah for purposes of comparison and if these two words are not used for any other inference, then all laws connected with one word apply to the other and vice-versa. The derivation here does not fulfill these conditions; hence, it is labelled to follow the rules of R. Aqiba who is not known to require too much formality in case the verse is used to give a biblical base to an old tradition.. Just as the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction before, so the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction before. And just as the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction after, so the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction after. That follows Rebbi Aqiba42Who is an exponent of intensional interpretation, whereas R. Ismael is an exponent of extensional interpretation. The rules of R. Ismael are systematized in his “13 rules” given in the introduction to the halakhic Midrash Sifra on Leviticus. The problem of both Rebbi Aqiba and Rebbi Ismael is that in its mishnaic-talmudic form, the rules of Jewish conduct form a logically consistent whole. It was shown earlier in this chapter, Notes 24 – 29, that rules must be consistent from one application to the next, such as rules of Grace and forming a court of law. But the basis of these laws, the words of the Torah, are unsystematic, fragmentary, and sometimes appear contradictory. Hence, one needs a method of translating the aphoristic text of the Torah in a legally consistent new language; cf. the author’s Logical problems in Jewish tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. P. Longworth, Blond, London 1966, 171–196. The rules are discussed in the medieval texts Introduction to the Talmud by R. Samuel Hanaggid and Sefer Keritut of R. Simson of Sens.. What following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael, an inference from the lesser to the greater43קל וחוֹמר, the first rule of R. Ismael. If there are two commandments, A and B, and if every rule for A is no more stringent than the corresponding rule for B, then a rule expressed for A that has no equivalent for B is valid also for B. The Babli (21a) quotes the following qal waḥomer in the name of R. Yoḥanan only and points out that the application here is not justified since it is self-contradictory. The Yerushalmi seems to be of the opinion that in the formulation given here, with “not more stringent” instead of “less stringent”, the argument is logically admissible.. If food that needs no explicit benediction before, needs a benediction afterwards, regarding Torah that needs a benediction before, it is only logical that it should need a benediction afterwards. That works for Torah; what about food? If Torah that needs no benediction afterwards, needs a benediction before, regarding food that needs a benediction afterwards, it is only logical that it should need a benediction before. Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan say, (1Sam. 9:13): “For he will recite the benediction over the sacrifice and after that the invited guests will eat.”44In the Babli (48b) and in the Mekhilta (loc. cit.) this is given in the name of R. Nathan only. A verse from Samuel (Biblical but not Pentateuchal) cannot prove a commandment but can prove a practice. Rebbi Nathan45In the Babli and the Mekhilta, this appears in the name of Rebbi Isaac. said, (Ex. 23:24) “you shall serve the Eternal, your God and give praise for your bread and your water”; when is it called your bread and your water, before you eat46The full verse seems to read: “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, then He will bless your bread and your water and I will remove sickness from your midst.” The switch from third to first person is awkward in any case. In the Babli (in particular, in the Sephardic incunabula print) it is spelled out: Do not read וּבֵרַךְ “He will bless” but וּבָרֵךְ “and praise”. However, the Bible Concordance of G. Lisowsky (Stuttgart 1958) takes the verse, as it stands, to mean “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, and praise for your bread and your water, then I will remove sickness from your midst.” One may recite a benediction one one’s bread and one’s water only before it is consumed; afterwards one may speak only of nourishment and sustenance.. Rebbi said, if he has to give praise when he ate and is satiated, somuch more at a time when he is hungry for food. That is for food, what about Torah? If food, which sustains only temporary life, needs a benediction before and after, Torah, which sustains eternal life, so much more47In the Babli and the Mekhilta this is a קל וחוֹמר of Rebbi Ismael..
רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְּעִי אִילֵּין שְׁלֹשָׁה קְרוּיוֹת מַה אַתְּ עֲבִיד לוֹן. כִּשְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת. אוֹ כִשְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. אִין תַּעַבְדִּינוּן כִּשְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת. הָרִאשׁוֹן מְבָרֵךְ בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה. וְהָאַחֲרוֹן בְּרָכָה אַחֲרוֹנָה. וְהָאֶמְצָעִי אֵינוֹ מְבָרֵךְ כָּל עִיקָּר. אִין תַּעַבְדִּינוּן כִּשְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ זֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְזֶה בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. אֲפִילוּ הָאֶמְצָעִי מְבָרֵךְ לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אֶבְדַּימִא לֹא לָמְדוּ בִּרְכַּת הַתּוֹרָה מִבִּרְכַּת [הַמָּזוֹן] אֶלָּא לְרַבִּים. וְאִם לְרַבִּים אֲפִילוּ בֵינוֹ לְבֵין עַצְמוֹ לֹא יְבָרֵךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּ מָרִי אַחֲוֵי דְּרִבִּי יוֹסֵי עֲשָׂאוּהָ כִּשְׁאָר כָּל מִצְוֹתֶיהָ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה. מַה שְׁאָר כָּל הַמִּצְוֹת טְעוּנוֹת בְּרָכָה. אַף זוּ טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה.
Rebbi Zeïra asked: These three that are called48For reading the Torah in public. Since the preceding arguments tied benedictions over Torah reading to Grace, one has to ask in which way they are comparable. In the Babli Megillah 21b there is a baraita: “(In reading the Torah) he who starts recites the benediction before and he who finishes recites the benediction after.” On that, the Gemara notes: But today, all recite benedictions before and after. This “today” may be long after the work on the Yerushalmi stopped. In any case, the baraita seems to represent the early Babylonian practice; we do not know of any direct Yerushalmi source that let people read the Torah without benediction. Rebbi Zeïra, the Galilean head of academy who had come from Babylonia, is the right person to ask for the reasons and the correct practice. Since his questions remain without answers, both practices might be acceptable. Both the preceding paragraph and R. Zeïra’s question presuppose that private Torah reading requires benedictions before and after, cf. מסכת סופרים Chap. 13 and Ezra Fleischer, קטעים מקובצי תפילה ארץ־ישראליים מן הגניזה, קובץ על יד יג (כג) 139–141, 188–189., how are you treating them? As three who ate together or as three who ate each one for himself? If you treat them as three who ate together then the first one recites the benediction before, the last one recites the benediction after, and the middle one does not recite any benediction at all. If you treat them as three who ate each one for himself then even the middle one recites benedictions before and after. Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon said, they did learn the benedictions for the Torah from Grace49Text of the parallel in Megillah 4:1; the Venice print has here “benediction of ‘invitation’ ”, a scribal error הזימון for המזון. only in public50R. Samuel ben Eudaimon seems to object to reciting a benediction after Torah study. Also, since Torah study is a permanent obligation (Jos. 1:8), one benediction in the morning is enough to cover all Torah study during the day and evening; one does not have to recite a new benediction for study after an interruption. The prayer manuals of Yerushalmi type (see Note 48) which have benedictions after the reading of Pentateuch, Prophets, and Hagiographs require these only for reading the Bible, not oral Torah study.. If in public, then in private one should not recite any benediction! Rebbi Abba Mari, the brother of Rebbi Yose51An Amora of the fourth generation who is never mentioned in the Babli., said: They made it equal to other commandments of the Torah. Just as other commandments of the Torah need benedictions, this also needs a benediction52Most commandments need only a benediction before, not after their execution. Thus, the benediction for the Torah in private study follows the general rule of benedictions over commandments. The quote for benediction for the Torah before the reading, Deut. 32:3, is clearly addressed to the public and, therefore, not applicable to private study..
Rebbi Zeïra asked: These three that are called48For reading the Torah in public. Since the preceding arguments tied benedictions over Torah reading to Grace, one has to ask in which way they are comparable. In the Babli Megillah 21b there is a baraita: “(In reading the Torah) he who starts recites the benediction before and he who finishes recites the benediction after.” On that, the Gemara notes: But today, all recite benedictions before and after. This “today” may be long after the work on the Yerushalmi stopped. In any case, the baraita seems to represent the early Babylonian practice; we do not know of any direct Yerushalmi source that let people read the Torah without benediction. Rebbi Zeïra, the Galilean head of academy who had come from Babylonia, is the right person to ask for the reasons and the correct practice. Since his questions remain without answers, both practices might be acceptable. Both the preceding paragraph and R. Zeïra’s question presuppose that private Torah reading requires benedictions before and after, cf. מסכת סופרים Chap. 13 and Ezra Fleischer, קטעים מקובצי תפילה ארץ־ישראליים מן הגניזה, קובץ על יד יג (כג) 139–141, 188–189., how are you treating them? As three who ate together or as three who ate each one for himself? If you treat them as three who ate together then the first one recites the benediction before, the last one recites the benediction after, and the middle one does not recite any benediction at all. If you treat them as three who ate each one for himself then even the middle one recites benedictions before and after. Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon said, they did learn the benedictions for the Torah from Grace49Text of the parallel in Megillah 4:1; the Venice print has here “benediction of ‘invitation’ ”, a scribal error הזימון for המזון. only in public50R. Samuel ben Eudaimon seems to object to reciting a benediction after Torah study. Also, since Torah study is a permanent obligation (Jos. 1:8), one benediction in the morning is enough to cover all Torah study during the day and evening; one does not have to recite a new benediction for study after an interruption. The prayer manuals of Yerushalmi type (see Note 48) which have benedictions after the reading of Pentateuch, Prophets, and Hagiographs require these only for reading the Bible, not oral Torah study.. If in public, then in private one should not recite any benediction! Rebbi Abba Mari, the brother of Rebbi Yose51An Amora of the fourth generation who is never mentioned in the Babli., said: They made it equal to other commandments of the Torah. Just as other commandments of the Torah need benedictions, this also needs a benediction52Most commandments need only a benediction before, not after their execution. Thus, the benediction for the Torah in private study follows the general rule of benedictions over commandments. The quote for benediction for the Torah before the reading, Deut. 32:3, is clearly addressed to the public and, therefore, not applicable to private study..
אָכַל דְּמַאי. הֲדָא אָמְרָה אָכַל פֵּירוֹת סָפֵק נִיתַקְּנוּ סָפֵק לֹא נִיתַקְּנוּ מְזַמְּנִין. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אַחֲוֵי דְּרִבִּי בְּרֶכְיָה. בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁגָּזְרוּ עַל הַדְּמַאי רוֹב עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ הָיוּ מַכְנִיסִין לְבָתֵּיהֶן. וַיי דָא אָמְרָה דָא כּוּתִי מְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו. וְאָהֵן כּוּתִי לָאו סָפֵק הוּא. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּא תִּיפְתָּר כְּמַן דָּמַר כּוּתִי כְגוֹי דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר כּוּתִי כְיִשְׂרָאֵל לְכָל דָּבָר.
“If one ate demay.”53Quote from the Mishnah. This means that, if one ate produce which perhaps was tithed54Food of which terumah and terumah of the tithe were taken so that it may be consumed without incurring guilt and perhaps was not tithed, one invites him. Rebbi Simeon, the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah55He is not otherwise mentioned in the Talmud.: At the time when they were instituting demai, most of the unlearned brought the harvest into their houses56The obligation to give terumah and tithe starts when produce is brought through the door of the house (or barn). The expression here implies that most of the unlearned followed the rules and ate only produce that was in order; only because of the severity of the offense of eating ṭevel was the rule of demai decreed since a minority of uneducated did not follow the rules for produce sold; in that case the probablity of having produce that was not in order was less than 50%. There is therefore no inference possible for the problem under discussion, where the probability of things being wrong is 50%.. Which one says that57Which part of the Mishnah does speak to our problem?? “One invites the Samaritan.” And is that Samaritan not doubtful58Since Samaritans do not follow rabbinic rules, we cannot check on the status of their produce.? Rebbi Abba said, explain it following what is said59Referring to the opinion of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel in the baraita; for him the Mishnah simply declares that Samaritans are counted as Jews and no inference is possible for our case. The question is left without answer.: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a Samaritan is like a Jew in all respects.
“If one ate demay.”53Quote from the Mishnah. This means that, if one ate produce which perhaps was tithed54Food of which terumah and terumah of the tithe were taken so that it may be consumed without incurring guilt and perhaps was not tithed, one invites him. Rebbi Simeon, the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah55He is not otherwise mentioned in the Talmud.: At the time when they were instituting demai, most of the unlearned brought the harvest into their houses56The obligation to give terumah and tithe starts when produce is brought through the door of the house (or barn). The expression here implies that most of the unlearned followed the rules and ate only produce that was in order; only because of the severity of the offense of eating ṭevel was the rule of demai decreed since a minority of uneducated did not follow the rules for produce sold; in that case the probablity of having produce that was not in order was less than 50%. There is therefore no inference possible for the problem under discussion, where the probability of things being wrong is 50%.. Which one says that57Which part of the Mishnah does speak to our problem?? “One invites the Samaritan.” And is that Samaritan not doubtful58Since Samaritans do not follow rabbinic rules, we cannot check on the status of their produce.? Rebbi Abba said, explain it following what is said59Referring to the opinion of Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel in the baraita; for him the Mishnah simply declares that Samaritans are counted as Jews and no inference is possible for our case. The question is left without answer.: A Samaritan is like a Gentile, the words of Rebbi. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, a Samaritan is like a Jew in all respects.