## Berakhot Daf 45b

###### Berakhot 45b:1
[Berakhot 45b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:1)

דְּנִיחָא לְהוּ דְּמַקְבַּע לְהוּ בְּחוֹבָה מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
in the case of a waiter, **because from the outset, they prefer to establish** their *zimmun* **as an obligation** rather than as an option.


###### Berakhot 45b:2
[Berakhot 45b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:2)

תָּא שְׁמַע: נָשִׁים מְזַמְּנוֹת לְעַצְמָן, וַעֲבָדִים מְזַמְּנִים לְעַצְמָן, נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים וּקְטַנִּים אִם רָצוּ לְזַמֵּן — אֵין מְזַמְּנִין. וְהָא נָשִׁים אֲפִילּוּ מְאָה וְהָא מְאָה נָשֵׁי כִּתְרֵי גַּבְרֵי דָּמְיָין, וְקָתָנֵי נָשִׁים מְזַמְּנוֹת לְעַצְמָן וַעֲבָדִים מְזַמְּנִין לְעַצְמָן!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara cites yet another proof. **Come and hear: Women form a *zimmun* for themselves and slaves form a *zimmun* for themselves;** however, **women, slaves, and minors,** even **if they wish to form a *zimmun*** together, **they may not form a *zimmun*. <b>But aren’t one hundred women** considered **the equivalent of two men,** in that they cannot constitute a prayer quorum? **And** yet, the *baraita* **teaches** that **women form a *zimmun* for themselves and**Canaanite**slaves form a *zimmun* for themselves**. Apparently, like women, two men can form a *zimmun* on their own.</b>


###### Berakhot 45b:3
[Berakhot 45b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:3)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם דְּאִיכָּא דֵּעוֹת.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara rejects this: **There it is different because,** although women cannot constitute a prayer quorum, since **there are** three individual **minds,** i.e., people, three women can fulfill the verse: “Praise God with me, and we will exalt His name together.” Two men cannot.


###### Berakhot 45b:4
[Berakhot 45b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:4)

אִי הָכִי, אֵימָא סֵיפָא: נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים אִם רָצוּ לְזַמֵּן — אֵין מְזַמְּנִין. אַמַּאי לָא, וְהָא אִיכָּא דֵּעוֹת!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara objects: **If so, say the latter clause** of this *baraita*: **Women and slaves, if they wish to form a *zimmun*, they may not form a *zimmun*. Why not? Aren’t** they individual **minds,** which should enable the collective praise of God?


###### Berakhot 45b:5
[Berakhot 45b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:5)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם מִשּׁוּם פְּרִיצוּתָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara responds: That is not the reason that women and slaves were prohibited from forming a *zimmun* together. Rather, **it is different there,** as the Sages were concerned with regard to women and slaves joining together **due to promiscuity.**


###### Berakhot 45b:6
[Berakhot 45b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:6)

תִּסְתַּיֵּים, דְּרַב דְּאָמַר אִם רָצוּ לְזַמֵּן — אֵין מְזַמְּנִין. דְּאָמַר רַב דִּימִי בַּר יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַב: שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת וְיָצָא אֶחָד מֵהֶם לַשּׁוּק — קוֹרְאִין לוֹ וּמְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו. טַעְמָא דְּקוֹרְאִין לוֹ, הָא לֹא קוֹרְאִין לוֹ — לָא!

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
In the dispute between Rav and Rabbi Yoḥanan, it is unclear which *amora* held which opinion. The Gemara seeks to resolve this: **Conclude that Rav** is the one who **said: If they wanted to join together, they may not form a *zimmun*. As Rav Dimi bar Yosef said** that **Rav said: Three** people **who ate as one and one of them went out to the marketplace, they call him and include him in the *zimmun*. The reason is because they call him;** by inference, **if they do not call him, no,** they cannot form a *zimmun*.


###### Berakhot 45b:7
[Berakhot 45b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:7)

שָׁאנֵי הָתָם דְּאִקְּבַעוּ לְהוּ בְּחוֹבָה מֵעִיקָּרָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara rejects this proof: **It is different there,** in the case of three who ate together and one of them left, because **from the outset, they established themselves as** a group of three who were **obligated** to form a *zimmun*. That is why they need to call him and include him in their *zimmun*.


###### Berakhot 45b:8
[Berakhot 45b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:8)

אֶלָּא תִּסְתַּיֵּים, דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן הוּא דְּאָמַר אִם רָצוּ לְזַמֵּן — אֵין מְזַמְּנִין, דְּאָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת — אֶחָד מֵהֶן יוֹצֵא בְּבִרְכַּת חֲבֵירוֹ.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara now attempts to prove the opposite: **Rather, conclude that Rabbi Yoḥanan is the one who said: If they wanted to join together, they may not form a *zimmun*, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana said** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Two** people **who ate as one, one fulfills his obligation** to recite a blessing **with the** recitation of the **blessing of the other.**


###### Berakhot 45b:9
[Berakhot 45b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:9)

וַהֲוֵינַן בַּהּ: מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן, תְּנֵינָא: שָׁמַע וְלֹא עָנָה — יָצָא! וְאָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא לוֹמַר שֶׁאֵין בִּרְכַּת הַזִּימּוּן בֵּינֵיהֶם. תִּסְתַּיֵּים.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara comments: **And we discussed it** in an attempt to clarify the *halakha*. **What is he teaching us? We** already **learned this** *halakha* explicitly: **One who heard** a blessing **and did not respond,** nevertheless **he fulfilled** his obligation **And Rabbi Zeira said:** Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement teaches us that **there is no blessing of *zimmun* among them.** Indeed, **conclude** that Rabbi Yoḥanan is the *amora* who held that two may not form a *zimmun*.


###### Berakhot 45b:10
[Berakhot 45b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא בַּר רַב הוּנָא לְרַב הוּנָא: וְהָא רַבָּנַן דַּאֲתוֹ מִמַּעְרְבָא אָמְרִי, אִם רָצוּ לְזַמֵּן — מְזַמְּנִין, מַאי לָאו דִּשְׁמִיעַ לְהוּ מֵרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן? לָא, דִּשְׁמִיעַ לְהוּ מֵרַב, מִקַּמֵּי דִּנְחֵית לְבָבֶל.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
With regard to this, **Rava bar Rav Huna said to** his father **Rav Huna: Didn’t the Sages who came from the West,** from Eretz Yisrael, **say that** two individuals who ate together, **if they wanted to join together, they may form a *zimmun*? What, is it not that they heard** it **from Rabbi Yoḥanan,** who was from Eretz Yisrael? Rav Huna answered: **No,** this is not a proof, as it is possible **that they heard** this *halakha* **from Rav before he** left Eretz Yisrael and **descended to Babylonia.**


###### Berakhot 45b:11
[Berakhot 45b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:11)

גּוּפָא. אָמַר רַב דִּימִי בַּר יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַב: שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת, וְיָצָא אֶחָד מֵהֶם לַשּׁוּק — קוֹרְאִין לוֹ, וּמְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: וְהוּא דְּקָרוּ לֵיהּ וְעָנֵי.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara now explains **the matter** of Rav’s statement **itself: Rav Dimi bar Yosef said** that **Rav said: Three** people **who ate as one and one of them went out to the marketplace, they call him and include him in the *zimmun*,** even if he is not beside them. And **Abaye said: This is** only in a case **that they call him and he responds,** but if he is too far away to answer he cannot be included.


###### Berakhot 45b:12
[Berakhot 45b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:12)

אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: וְלָא אֲמַרַן, אֶלָּא בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה, אֲבָל בַּעֲשָׂרָה עַד דְּנֵיתֵי.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Mar Zutra said: We only said** this, that it is sufficient to hear and answer, **with regard to** a *zimmun* of **three; but, with regard to** a quorum of **ten,** they may not form a *zimmun* which includes mention of God’s name **until** the one who left **comes** and sits with them.


###### Berakhot 45b:13
[Berakhot 45b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:13)

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי: אַדְּרַבָּא אִיפְּכָא מִסְתַּבְּרָא תִּשְׁעָה נִרְאִין כַּעֲשָׂרָה, שְׁנַיִם אֵין נִרְאִין כִּשְׁלֹשָׁה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Rav Ashi strongly objects to this: On the contrary, the opposite is more reasonable. Nine** people who ate together **appear like ten,** so even if one is missing, the quorum does not seem to be incomplete. **Two** people who ate together **do not appear like three,** so it would be reasonable to require the actual presence of the third.


###### Berakhot 45b:14
[Berakhot 45b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:14)

וְהִלְכְתָא כְּמָר זוּטְרָא. מַאי טַעְמָא? — כֵּיוָן דְּבָעֵי לְאַדְכּוֹרֵי שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם — בְּצִיר מֵעֲשָׂרָה לָאו אוֹרַח אַרְעָא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Mar Zutra. <b>What**is**the reason? Because**in****a *zimmun* of ten **they need to mention the Name of Heaven,**and****it is**not proper conduct**to invoke the Name of Heaven with **fewer than ten** people present.</b>


###### Berakhot 45b:15
[Berakhot 45b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:15)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: נְקִיטִינַן שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת — מִצְוָה לֵיחָלֵק. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: שְׁנַיִם שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת — מִצְוָה לֵיחָלֵק. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים, כְּשֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם סוֹפְרִים, אֲבָל אֶחָד סוֹפֵר וְאֶחָד בּוּר — סוֹפֵר מְבָרֵךְ, וּבוּר יוֹצֵא.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
With regard to the *halakhot* of *zimmun*, **Abaye said** that **we have a tradition: Two** people **who ate as one, it is a mitzva** for them **to separate** and for each to recite a blessing for himself. **This was also taught** in a *baraita*: **Two** people **who ate as one, it is a mitzva** for them **to separate** The *baraita*, however, adds: **In what** case **are these matters stated?** Specifically **when both** individuals **are learned people [*soferim*]** and capable of reciting prayers and blessings. **However,** if **one of them was a learned person and the other an ignoramus, the learned person recites the blessing** and **the ignoramus thereby fulfills** his obligation.


###### Berakhot 45b:16
[Berakhot 45b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:16)

אָמַר רָבָא: הָא מִילְּתָא אַמְרִיתָא אֲנָא, וְאִיתַּמְרָה מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי זֵירָא כְּווֹתִי: שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת, אֶחָד מַפְסִיק לַשְּׁנַיִם, וְאֵין שְׁנַיִם מַפְסִיקִין לָאֶחָד.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
**Rava said: This is a statement that I said and it was stated in the name of Rabbi Zeira in accordance with my** opinion: **Three** people **who ate as one** but did not conclude their meals together, **one interrupts** his meal in order **to** join the other **two** in a *zimmun*, **but two do not interrupt** their meal **to** join the other **one** in a *zimmun*.


###### Berakhot 45b:17
[Berakhot 45b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:17)

וְלָא? וְהָא רַב פָּפָּא אַפְסֵיק לֵיהּ לְאַבָּא מָר בְּרֵיהּ אִיהוּ וְחַד! שָׁאנֵי רַב פָּפָּא, דְּלִפְנִים מִשּׁוּרַת הַדִּין הוּא דַּעֲבַד.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara challenges: **And** do two really **not** interrupt their meal to join the other one in a *zimmun*? **Didn’t Rav Pappa interrupt** his meal **to** enable **Abba Mar, his son,** to recite the *zimmun* blessing; and, in that case, it was Rav Pappa **and one** other person? The Gemara responds: The case of **Rav Pappa is different, as** he **acted beyond the letter of the law.**


###### Berakhot 45b:18
[Berakhot 45b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:18)

יְהוּדָה בַּר מָרִימָר וּמָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי וְרַב אַחָא מִדִּיפְתִּי כָּרְכִי רִיפְתָּא בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי, לָא הֲוָה בְּהוּ חַד דַּהֲוָה מוּפְלָג מֵחַבְרֵיהּ לְבָרוֹכֵי לְהוּ. יָתְבִי וְקָא מִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הָא דִּתְנַן שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁאָכְלוּ כְּאַחַת חַיָּיבִין לְזַמֵּן, הָנֵי מִילֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאִיכָּא אָדָם גָּדוֹל, אֲבָל הֵיכָא דְּכִי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ — חִלּוּק בְּרָכוֹת עָדִיף.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara relates that three Sages, **Yehuda bar Mareimar, Mar bar Rav Ashi and Rav Aḥa of Difti ate bread together. None among them was greater than the other** in either age or wisdom, rendering him the obvious choice to **recite the blessing on their behalf. They sat down and raised a dilemma: That which we learned** in our mishna: **Three** people **who ate as one are required to join together** and recite Grace after Meals, does **that apply only when there is a great man** among them, **but where they are on a par with each other,** perhaps **separating** and reciting independent **blessings is preferable?**


###### Berakhot 45b:19
[Berakhot 45b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:19)

בָּרֵיךְ אִינִישׁ לְנַפְשֵׁיהּ. אֲתוֹ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּמָרִימָר. אָמַר לְהוּ: יְדֵי בְּרָכָה יְצָאתֶם, יְדֵי זִימּוּן לֹא יְצָאתֶם. וְכִי תֵּימְרוּ: נֶיהְדַּר וּנְזַמֵּן, אֵין זִימּוּן לְמַפְרֵעַ.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
Indeed, that is what they did, and **each person recited the blessing for himself.** Later, **they came before Mareimar** to ask him if they had acted correctly. Mareimar **said to them:** Although **you fulfilled your** obligation to recite a **blessing** over your food, **you did not fulfill** your obligation to form a ***zimmun*. And if you say: Let us go back and form a *zimmun*, there is no retroactive *zimmun*.** Once the blessing over the meal has been recited, one can no longer recite the *zimmun*.


###### Berakhot 45b:20
[Berakhot 45b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:20)

בָּא וּמְצָאָן כְּשֶׁהֵן מְבָרְכִים, מַהוּ אוֹמֵר אַחֲרֵיהֶם? רַב זְבִיד אָמַר: ״בָּרוּךְ וּמְבוֹרָךְ״. רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: עוֹנֶה ״אָמֵן״.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara discusses another question: **One who came and found them reciting the** *zimmun* **blessing, what does he say after them** in response to the *zimmun*.**Rav Zevid said** that he says: **Blessed** is He **and blessed** is His Name for ever and all time (*Tosafot*). **Rav Pappa said: He answers amen.**


###### Berakhot 45b:21
[Berakhot 45b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:21)

וְלָא פְּלִיגִי, הָא — דְּאַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ דְּקָא אָמְרִי ״נְבָרֵךְ״, וְהָא — דְּאַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ דְּקָא אָמְרִי ״בָּרוּךְ״. אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ דְּקָא אָמְרִי ״נְבָרֵךְ״ — אוֹמֵר ״בָּרוּךְ וּמְבוֹרָךְ״, אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ דְּקָא אָמְרִי ״בָּרוּךְ״ — עוֹנֶה ״אָמֵן״.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara explains that Rav Zevid and Rav Pappa **do not disagree. This is** in a case **where he found them saying: Let us bless; and that is** in a case **where he found them saying: Blessed be.** The Gemara specifies: **Where he found them saying: Let us bless, he says: Blessed** is He **and blessed** is His Name for ever and all time; **where he found them saying: Blessed be, he answers amen.**


###### Berakhot 45b:22
[Berakhot 45b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:22)

תָּנֵי חֲדָא: הָעוֹנֶה ״אָמֵן״ אַחַר בִּרְכוֹתָיו — הֲרֵי זֶה מְשׁוּבָּח. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: הֲרֵי זֶה מְגוּנֶּה.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
A similar explanation resolves a difficulty in a related topic. **One** *baraita* **taught: One who answers amen after his** own **blessings, it is praiseworthy. Another** *baraita* **taught: It is reprehensible.**


###### Berakhot 45b:23
[Berakhot 45b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:23)

לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא — בְּ״בוֹנֶה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם״. הָא — בִּשְׁאָר בְּרָכוֹת.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara resolves this apparent contradiction: This is **not difficult. This,** where the first *baraita* says that it is praiseworthy to answer amen after his own blessing, **is in** the blessing: **Who builds Jerusalem; this,** where the second *baraita* deems it offensive, **is in other blessings.**


###### Berakhot 45b:24
[Berakhot 45b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Berakhot/r/45b:24)

אַבָּיֵי עָנֵי לֵיהּ בְּקָלָא, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלִשְׁמְעוּ פּוֹעֲלִים וְלֵיקוּמוּ, דְּ״הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב״ לָאו דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. רַב אָשֵׁי עָנֵי לֵיהּ בִּלְחִישָׁא, כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלָא נְזַלְזְלוּ בְּ״הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב״.

**Tractate Berakot by A. Cohen, Cambridge University Press, 1921:**
The Gemara relates: **Abaye would answer** amen **aloud** after reciting the blessing: Who builds Jerusalem, **so the workers would hear and stand** to return to work, **as** the ensuing blessing: **Who is good and does good, is not** required **by Torah law,** so the laborers working for the homeowner need not recite it. **Rav Ashi,** on the other hand, would **answer** amen **in a whisper, so that** those who heard him **would not relate to** the blessing: **Who is good and does good, with contempt.**