## Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot Chapter 6 ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:1) **משנה:** כֵּיצַד מְבָ‍רְכִין עַל הַפֵּירוֹת עַל פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ. חוּץ מִן הַיַּיִן שֶׁעַל הַיַּיִן הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְרִי הַגֶּפֶן. וְעַל פֵּירוֹת הָאָרֶץ הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה. חוּץ מִן הַפַּת שֶׁעַל הַפַּת הוּא אוֹמֵר הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. וְעַל הַיְּרָקוֹת הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי דְּשָָׁאִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** Which benedictions are recited on produce¹? 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 bread² 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 vegetables³.” footnotes: ¹ Before 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. ² The 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. ³ Rebbi Yehudah insists that benedictions should be exact and vegetables without seeds do not qualify as “fruits”. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:2) **הלכה:** כְּתִיב לַיי הָאָרֶץ וּמְלוֹאָהּ תֵּבֵל וְיוֹשְׁבֵי בָהּ. הַנֶּהֱנֶה כְּלוּם מִן הָעוֹלָם מָעַל עַד שֶׁיַּתִּירוּ לוֹ הַמִּצְוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ כְּתִיב פֶּן תִּקְדַּשׁ הַמְלֵאָה הַזֶּרַע אֲשֶׁר תִּזְרָע וּתְבוּאַת הַכָּרֶם. הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ וּמְלוֹאוֹ עָשׂוּי כְּכֶרֶם. וּמַהוּ פִדְיוֹנוֹ בְּרָכָה. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה רִבִּי אָבוּן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ אָמַרְתְּ לַיי יי אַתָּה טוֹבָתִי בַּל עָלֶיךָ. אִם אָכַלְתָּ וּבֵירַכְתָּ כִּבְיָכוֹל כְּאִילּוּ מִשֶּׁלָּךְ אָכַלְתָּ. דָּבָר אַחֵר טוֹבָתִי בַּל עָלֶיךָ מְבַלֶּה אֲנִי טוֹבָתִי בְּגוּפָךְ. דָּבָר אַחֵר טוֹבָתִי בַּל עָלֶיךָ. יְבַלְלוּ כָּל הַטּוֹבוֹת וְיָבוֹאוּ עָלֶיךָ. אָמַר רִבִּי אָחָא מַהוּ בַּל עָלֶיךָ. שֶׁאֵינִי מֵבִיא טוֹבָה עַל הָעוֹלָם מִבַּלְעָדֶיךָ. כְּמַה דְּאַתְּ אָמַר וּבַּלְעָדֶיךְ לֹא יָרִים אִישׁ אֶת יָדוֹ. תַּנִּי רִבִּי חִיָיא קוֹדֶשׁ הִילּוּלִים מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהוּא טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. מִיכַּן הָיָה רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר לֹא יִטְעוֹם אָדָם כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁיְבָרֵךְ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **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 larceny⁴ until good deeds will permit him⁵ 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 benediction⁶ 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 Master⁷, my good is only with You.” If you ate and recited the benedictions then it is as if you ate from your own. Another explanation⁸ 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.⁹” 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 praise¹⁰ 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.. footnotes: ⁴ Since he uses God’s property, not his own. ⁵ The obligation to say Grace after a meal is spelled out in Deut. ⁶ This 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. ⁷ The translation follows the Biblical text, not the text written here. ⁸ The 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. ⁹ Taking בל as shorthand for בִּלְעֲדֵי “without”. ¹⁰ This is also quoted in the Babli (35a); the source of both Talmudim is Sifra ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:3) רִבִּי חַגַּיי וְרִבִּי יִרְמְיָה סָ‍לְקוּן לְבֵּי חַנְוָותָא קָפַץ רִבִּי חַגַּיי וּבֵירַךְ עֲלֵיהֶן. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה יְאוּת עָ‍בְדַת שֶׁכָּל הַמִּצְוֹת טְעוּנוֹת בְּרָכָה. וּמְנַיִין שֶׁכָּל הַמִּצְוֹת טְעוּנוֹת בְּרָכָה. רִבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כַּהֲנָא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת לוּחוֹת הָאֶבֶן הַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְוָה. הִקִּישׁ תּוֹרָה לְמִצְוָה. מַה תוֹרָה טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה אַף מִצְוָה טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Ḥaggai and Rebbi Jeremiah went to the Bazaar¹¹ 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 commandments¹² 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 commandment¹³ 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. footnotes: ¹¹ The translation is tentative; בית חנוותא means “the house of stores”, which might be a description of a shuq ¹² After 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). ¹³ The verse really reads: “both Torah and Commandments”. The double vaw ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:4) רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן נְסַב זֵייתָא וּבֵירַךְ לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו וַהֲוָה רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא מִסְתַּכֵּל בֵּיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בַּבְלָיָא לָמָּה אַתְּ מִסְתַּכֵּל בִּי. לֵית לָךְ כָּל שֶׁהוּא מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. אִית לֵיהּ. וּמַה צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגַּלְעִינָתוֹ מְמַעַטְתּוֹ. וְלֵית לֵיהּ לְרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן שֶׁגַּלְעִינָתוֹ מְמַעַטְתּוֹ. מַה עֲבַד לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם בִּירְיָיה. מִילְתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָ‍מְרָה שֶׁכֵּן אֲפִילוּ אָכַל פְּרִידָה אַחַת שֶׁל שֶׁל עֵנָב אוֹ פְּרִידָה אַחַת שֶׁל רִימּוֹן שֶׁהוּא טָעוּן בְּרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Yoḥanan took an olive¹⁴ 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 Kinds¹⁵ 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 it¹⁶. Does Rebbi Yoḥanan agree that its pit reduces it? What Rebbi Yoḥanan did was because of a creature¹⁷) 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 after¹⁸. footnotes: ¹⁴ Here 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. ¹⁵ The Seven Kinds are “the fruits for which the Land of Israel is praised”, enumerated in Deut. ¹⁶ In 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. ¹⁷ The Babli (loc. cit. ¹⁸ A 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:5) יַיִן בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא כְּמוֹת שֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ וְאֵין נוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנּוּ לַיָּדַיִם. בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא מָזוּג אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגֶּפֶן וְנוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנּוּ לַיָּדַיִם דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים בֵּין חַי בֵּין מָזוּג אוֹמְרִים עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגֶּפֶן וְנוֹטְלִין מִמֶּנּוּ לַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּא אֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם אוֹבְדַּן אוֹכְלִין. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ¹⁹ 4:3 and Babli 50b.“Wine in its natural state²⁰, one says for it ‘Creator of the fruit of the tree’²¹ and one may not use it to wash his hands²²; when it is mixed²³2:7., 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 hands²⁴.” Rebbi Abba said, it is not forbidden because of wasting food²⁵ explains that the prohibition of the Sages (in the version of the Babli) refers to the sin of wasting food.. footnotes: ¹⁹ Parallel texts in Tosephta Berakhot ²⁰ A heavy subtropical wine with an alcohol content of close to 15%, unmixed with any water. ²¹ R. 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. ²² Hands must be washed with water and while fruit juice is considered water, in the opinion of R. Eliezer pure wine is not. ²³ Standard mixing is one part wine to two parts water for an alcohol content of about 5%, Mishnah Niddah ²⁴ All 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. ²⁵ In 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 ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:6 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:6) רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר זַבְדִּי בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ. אָמַר רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר פַּפָּא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא וּמַתְנִיתָא אָ‍מְרָה כֵן. חוּץ מִן הַיַּיִן שֶׁעַל הַיַּיִן הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְרִי הַגֶּפֶן. וְיַיִן לָאו שָׁחוּק הוּא. לָא מַר אֶלָּא חוּץ מִן הַיַּיִן הָא שְׁאָר כָּל הַדְּבָרִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשְּׁחוּקִין בְּעֵיינָן הֵן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu²⁶: On olive oil one recites “Creator of the fruit of the tree.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Pappus²⁷ 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 mashed²⁸? But it says only “except for wine”, hence all other things even if they are mashed are recognizable in their state. footnotes: ²⁶ In the Babli (35b) this is a statement of R. Yoḥanan. The argument of R. Ḥiyya bar Pappus is purely Yerushalmi. ²⁷ An otherwise unknown Galilean Amora. In the Rome manuscript, his name is Rebbi Ḥinena bar Pappus. ²⁸ Grape 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.” ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:7 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:7) רִבִּי אַבָּא אָמַר רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל תְּרַוֵּיהוֹן אָ‍מְרִין יֶרֶק שָׁלוּק אוֹמֵר עָלָיו שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל רָאשֵׁי לִפְתּוֹת שֶׁשָּׁ‍לְקָן אִם בְּעֵינָן הֵן אוֹמֵר עֲלֵיהֶן בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה. שְׁחָקָן אוֹמֵר עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וּמַתְנִיתָא אָ‍מְרָה כֵן. חוּץ מִן הַפַּת שֶׁעַל הַפַּת הוּא אוֹמֵר הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. וּפַת לָאו שְׁחוּקָה הִיא. לָא מַר אֶלָּא חוּץ מִן הַפַּת הָא שְׁאָר כָּל הַדְּבָרִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשְּׁחוּקִין בְּעֵינָן הֵן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Abba²⁹ 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 cooked³⁰ pieces of *liftan*³¹, 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 mashed³²? But it says only “except for bread”, hence all other things even if they are mashed are recognizable in their state³³. footnotes: ²⁹ In 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. ³⁰ שלוק “cooked in water” in contrast to מבושל “cooked in broth”. ³¹ As 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. ³² Flour is ground (“mashed”) grain, one of the Seven Kinds. ³³ Hence, the statement of Rebbi Abba is superior to that of Rebbi Zeïra. This conclusion is the opposite of that of the Babli. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:8 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:8) רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן זַיִת כָּבוּשׁ אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ. רִבִּי בִּנְיָמִן בַּר יֶפֶת בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן יֶרֶק שָׁלוּק אוֹמֵר עָלָיו שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק מַתְנִיתָא מְסַיְיעָא לְרִבִּי בִּנְיָמִן בַּר יֶפֶת. אֲבָל לֹא כְבוּשִׁין וְלֹא שְׁלוּקִין וְלֹא מְבוּשָּׁלִין אִם בְּעֵיינָן הֵן אָדָם יוֹצֵא בָּהֶן יְדֶי חוֹבָתוֹ בַפֶּסַח. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָא מַאן יְדַע מַשְׁמַע מִן רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן יֵאוּת רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא [אוֹ] רִבִּי בִּנְיָמִן בַּר יֶפֶת. לֹא רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא. וְעוֹד מִן הֲדָא מִן מַה דַּאֲנָן חֲמִיָין רַבָּנָן רַבְרְבָיָא עָלוּן לְאַבְרִיָיתָא וְנָ‍סְבִין תּוּרמוּסִין וּמְבָ‍רְכִין עֲלֵיהֶן בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה. וְתוּרְמוּסִין לָאו שְׁלוּקִין הֵן. אִין תֵּימַר שַׁנְיָיא הִיא שֶׁאָ‍מְרָה הַתּוֹרָה מְרוֹרִין תּוּרְמוּסִין כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁ‍לְקָן בָּ‍טְלָה מָרָתָן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי אָבוּן וְלֹא פְלִיגִין. זַיִת עַל יְדֵי שֶׁדַּרְכּוֹ לֵאָכֵל חַי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּבוּשׁ בְּעֵינוֹ הוּא. יֶרֶק כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁ‍לְקוֹ נִשְׁתַּנֶּה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** ³⁴ 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 marinated³⁵ olives. Rebbi Benjamin bar Jephet in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: One says “By Whose word everything was created³⁶” on water-cooked vegetables. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said: a Mishnah supports Rebbi Benjamin bar Yephet: (*Pesaḥim*2:6) “but not marinated or cooked in water or cooked in broth³⁷”; 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?³⁸ And in addition from the fact that we see great rabbis going to a mourner’s meal, eat lupines³⁹ 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, they⁴⁰ 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 cooked⁴¹).. footnotes: ³⁴ The entire paragraph is also found in Pesaḥim ³⁵ This is the exact meaning of the corresponding Arabic כַּבַּסַ. ³⁶ The general benediction on everything not expressly mentioned in the Mishnah. ³⁷ The 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. ³⁸ R. 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. ³⁹ Greek 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. ⁴⁰ R. Ḥiyya bar Abba and R. Benjamin bar Yephet. ⁴¹ One 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:9 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:9) רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא אָמַר אִיתְפַּלְגּוּן רִבִּי [נְחֶמְיָה] וְרַבָּנָן. רִבִּי [נְחֶמְיָה] אָמַר הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. וְרַבָּנָן אָ‍מְרֵי מוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. אַתְיָיא אִילֵּין פְּלוּגְוָותָא כְּאִינּוּן פְּלוּגְוָותָא. לֶפֶת רִבִּי חִינְנָא בַּר יִצְחָק וְרִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר אִימִּי חַד אָמַר לֶפֶת לָא פַת הָיְתָה. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר לֶפֶת לָא פַת הִיא עֲתִידָה לִהְיוֹת. יְהִי פִיסַּת בַּר בָּאָרֶץ בְּרֹאשׁ הָרִים. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְּרִיךְ קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעִירָא הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ וְקַלְּסֵיהּ. מַה כְּרִבִּי נְחֶמְיָה שֶׁלֹּא לְעָרֵב רָאשֵׁי אוֹתִיוֹת. מֵעַתָּה הַמִּן הָאָרֶץ. שֶׁלֹּא לְעָרֵב רָאשֵׁי אוֹתִיּוֹת. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ רִבִּי [נְחֶמְיָה] הַבּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגֶּפֶן. וְעַל דַּעְתְּהוֹן דְּרַבָּנָן בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הַגֶּפֶן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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.⁴³” This disagreement is like that disagreement: לפת, Rebbi Ḥinena bar Isaac⁴⁴ and Rebbi Samuel bar Immi⁴⁵; one said “*lefet*, was it not bread?⁴⁵” 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.⁴⁷ 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 Neḥemiah⁴⁸? Not to amalgamate the letters⁴⁹ but clearly be said in two distinct words.! If it is so, הַמִּין הָאָרֶץ⁵⁰ 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 Neḥemiah⁵¹, “He Who created the fruit of the vine”; in the opinion of the rabbis “Who creates the fruit of the vine.” footnotes: ⁴³ In 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. ⁴⁴ A preacher of the third generation of Galilean Amoraïm. The name of his teacher is unknown. ⁴⁵ A Galilean Amora of the third generation who also appears as R. Samuel bar Ammi. His father and father-in-law also were rabbis. ⁴⁵ A Galilean Amora of the third generation who also appears as R. Samuel bar Ammi. His father and father-in-law also were rabbis. ⁴⁷ Since 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 ⁴⁸ One is not supposed to follow a minority of one, much less to be praised for it. ⁴⁹ So that הָעוֹלָם מוֹצִיא should not be pronounced ha‘ôlāmôẓî, ⁵⁰ Since לֶחֶם מִן also has two consecutive mem ⁵¹ One wonders why they disagree only about the language for bread and not for wine. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:10 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:10) רִבִּי זְרִיקָן אָמַר רִבִּי זְעוּרָא בָּעֵי אֲהֵן דִּנְסַב תּוּרְמוּסֶא וּמְבָרֵךְ עִילוֹי וְנָפַל מִינֵיהּ מַהוּ מְבָ‍רְכָה עִילוֹי זְמָן תִּנְיָינוּת. מַה בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין אַמַּת הַמַּיִם. אָ‍מְרִין תַּמָּן לְכַךְ כִּיוֵּן דַּעְתּוֹ מִתְּחִילָּה. בְּרַם הָכָא לֹא לְכַךְ כִּיוֵּן דַּעְתּוֹ מִתְּחִילָּה. תַּנִּי רִבִּי חִיָיא אֵין מְבָ‍רְכִין עַל הַפַּת אֶלָּא בְשָׁעָה שֶׁהוּא פּוֹרֵס. אָמַר רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא הֲדָא אָ‍מְרָה אֲהֵן דִּנְסַב עִיגּוּלָא וּמְבָרֵךְ עִילוֹי וְהָכָא לֹא אָתִי בְיָדֵיהּ צָרִיךְ מְבָ‍רְכָה עִילוֹי זְמָן תִּנְיָינוּת. אָמַר רִבִּי תַּנְחוּם בַּר יוּדָן צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר בָּרוּךְ שֵׁם כְּבוֹד מַלְכוּתוֹ לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד. שֶׁלֹּא לְהַזְכִּיר שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם לְבַטָּלָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 benediction⁵²? What is the difference between that and a water canal⁵³? 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 it⁵⁴. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: This means that he who took a loaf⁵⁵ and pronounced the benediction on it before it came to his hand, must recite a second benediction. Rebbi Tanḥum bar Yudan⁵⁶ 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 vain⁵⁷. footnotes: ⁵² Since 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. ⁵³ Since 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. ⁵⁴ The 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. ⁵⁵ The 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. ⁵⁶ A Galilean Amora whose time cannot be determined. ⁵⁷ By a statement of R. Yoḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish in the Babli (33a), any unnecessary benediction is a violation of the Fifth Commandment. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:11 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:11) עַד כַּמָּה יִפְרוֹס. רִבִּי חִנְנָא וְרִבִּי מָנָא חַד אָמַר עַד כְּזַיִת. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר עַד פָּחוֹת מִכְּזַיִת. מַאן דָּמַר כְּזַיִת. כְּיַי דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן וְכוּלָּן פְּתִיתִין כְּזַיִת. מַאן דָּמַר עַד פָּחוֹת מִכְּזַיִת תַּנִּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֲפִילוּ מַחֲזִירָהּ לְסוֹלְתָהּ. תַּנִּי כָּל שֶׁאוֹמֵר אַחֲרָיו שְׁלֹשָׁה בְּרָכוֹת אוֹמֵר לְפָנָיו הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. וְכָל שֶׁאֵין אַחֲרָיו שְׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת אֵין אוֹמֵר לְפָנָיו הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. הֲתִיבוּן הֲרֵי פָּחוֹת מִכְּזַיִת הֲרֵי אֵין אוֹמֵר לְאַחֲרָיו שְׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. מֵעַתָּה לֹא יֹאמְרוּ לְפָנָיו הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אַחָא אָמַר לִשְׁאָר הַמִּינִין נִצְרְכָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** How far may he break⁵⁸ 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 “all⁵⁹7:4 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 it⁶⁰ to its original form of fine flour.” It has been stated⁶¹ 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 kinds⁶². footnotes: ⁵⁸ There 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. ⁵⁹ This refers to Mishnah Menaḥot ⁶⁰ The baked or fried flour-offering. ⁶¹ The first half of this statement appears in Tosephta Berakhot ⁶² The 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:12 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:12) רִבִּי אַבָּא בְּשֵׁם רַב מְסוּבִּין אֲסוּרִין לִטְעוֹם כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁיִּטְעוֹם הַמְבָרֵךְ. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר שׁוֹתִין אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא שָׁתָה. מַה פְּלִיג. מַה דָּמַר רַב כְּשֶׁהָיוּ כּוּלָּם זְקוּקִין לְכִכָּר אֶחָד מַה דָּמַר רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּשֶׁהָיָה כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד כּוֹסוֹ בְיָדוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 loaf⁶³ but Rebbi Joshua said when each one had his own cup in his hand. footnotes: ⁶³ Which 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.] ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:13 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:13) תַּנִּי הַמְבָרֵךְ פּוֹשֵׁט יָדוֹ תְחִילָּה אֶלָּא אִם רָצָה לַחֲלוֹק לוֹ כָּבוֹד לְרַבּוֹ אוֹ לְמִי שֶׁגָּדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בַּתּוֹרָה הָ‍רְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ. רַב כַּד הֲוָה קְצִי הֲוָה טְעִים בִּשְׂמָאלֵיהּ וּמַפְלִיג בִּימִינֵיהּ. רַב הוּנָא אֲמַר אֲהֵן דָּמַר סַב בְרִיךְ סַב בְרִיךְ אֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם הֶפְסֵק בְּרָכָה. הַב אַחֲוָונָא לְתוֹרָיָיא יֵשׁ בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם הֶפְסֵק בְּרָכָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** It has been stated: The one who recited the benediction takes first⁶⁴ 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 hand⁶⁵. Rav Huna said: “Take and recite a benediction, take and recite a benediction” is not an interruption for the benediction⁶⁶; “give hay to the oxen” is an interruption for the benediction⁶⁷. footnotes: ⁶⁴ From the food on his plate (Babli 47a). ⁶⁵ To minimize the time between the benediction and the actual eating by the other participants in the meal. ⁶⁶ Since 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. ⁶⁷ In 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:14 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:14) רַב הוּנָא אָמַר הֲדָא שְׁתִיתָא וַהֲדָא מוֹרֶתָּא שְׁחִיקְתָּא אוֹמֵר עָלָיו שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rab Ḥuna said: On *shatita*⁶⁸ 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”. footnotes: ⁶⁸ The Aramaic shatita ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:15 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:15) רַב הוּנָא אָמַר הֲרֵי שֶׁנָּתַן לְתוֹךְ פִּיו וְשָׁכַח וְלֹא בֵּירַךְ אִם הָיוּ מַשְׁקִין פּוֹלְטָן. אִם הָיוּ אוֹכְלִין מְסַלְּקָן לִצְדָדִין. רִבִּי יִצְחָק בַּר מַרִי קוֹמוֹי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי אָבוּן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אֲפִילוּ אוֹכְלִין פּוֹלְטָן דִּכְתִיב יִמָּלֵא פִי תְּהִילָּתֶךָ כָּל הַיּוֹם תִּפְאַרְתֶּךָ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 side⁶⁹. Rebbi Isaac bar Mari⁷⁰) 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 praise⁷² 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.” footnotes: ⁶⁹ In 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. ⁷⁰ His name appears only here. In the Babli (loc. cit. ⁷² This text is also in Tosephta Berakhot ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:16 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:16) הַכּוֹסֵס אֶת הַחִטִּים אוֹמֵר עֲלֶיהֶן בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי זֶרְעוֹנִין. אָ‍פְיָין וּבִישְּׁלָן בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַפְּרוּסוֹת קַיָימוֹת אוֹמֵר עֲלֵיהֶן הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ וּמְבָרֵךְ לְאַחֲרָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. אִם אֵין הַפְּרוּסוֹת קַיָימוֹת אוֹמֵר עֲלֵיהֶן בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מְזוֹנוֹת וּמְבָרֵךְ אַחֲרָיו בְּרָכָה אַחַת מֵעֵין שָׁלֹשׁ. עַד כַּמָּה יְהוּ פְרוּסוֹת. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי אָבוּן כַּהֲנָא בַּר מַלְכִּיָּה בְּשֶׁם רַב עַד כְּזֵיתִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 three⁷² 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 Malkiah⁷³ in the name of Rav: down to olive-sized bits. footnotes: ⁷² This text is also in Tosephta Berakhot ⁷³ Rav 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:17 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:17) הַכּוֹסֵס אֶת הָאוֹרֶז אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי זֶרְעוֹנִים. אָפְייוֹ וּבִישְּׁלוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַפְּרוּסוֹת קַיָימוֹת אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מְזוֹנוֹת וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ אַחֲרָיו לְבָרֵךְ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה. בַּר מְרִינָה בְּרִיךְ קוֹמֵי רִבִּי זְעוּרָא וְקוֹמֵי רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חֲסִידָא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מַעֲדָנִים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּי רִבִּי אָבוּן וְלָא פְלִיגִין מַאן דָּמַר בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מְזוֹנוֹת בְּהַהִיא דַּעֲבִיד בּוּל. מַאן דָּמַר בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה בְּהַהוּא דִּבְרִיר. מַאן דָּמַר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ בְּהַהוּא דִּשְׁלִיק. וּמַאן דָּמַר בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מַעֲדָנִים בְּהַהוּא דִּטְרִיף. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** He who chews rice⁷⁴ 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 afterwards⁷⁵ 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.⁷⁶” 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 separated⁷⁷) in which no individual kernels are visible.. He who said “By Whose word everything was created”, if it is cooked in water a long time⁷⁸. He who said “Creator of all sorts of delicacies”, if it is torn⁷⁹. footnotes: ⁷⁴ Greek ὄρυζα. ⁷⁵ Tosephta Berakhot ⁷⁶ From their silence one may infer that they agreed. ⁷⁷ If the individual kernels are still recognizable, in contrast to the ball (Latin bulla ⁷⁸ If it is a mash. ⁷⁹ If one bakes any kind of rice product with spices, except whole grains. [The Babli does not admit different benedictions for different cases.] ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:18 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:18) עַד כְּדוֹן בַּתְּחִילָּה. בְּסוֹף רִבִּי יוֹנָה בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חֲסִידָא אֲשֶׁר בָּרָא מִינֵי מַעֲדָנִים לְעַדֵּן בָּהֶן נֶפֶשׁ כָּל חַי בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יי עַל הָאָרֶץ וְעַל מַעֲדָנֶיהָ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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.”⁸⁰ footnotes: ⁸⁰ It 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.] ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:19 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:19) רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יַעֲקֹב בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יִצְחָק רוּבָּא רִבִּי כְּשֶׁהָיָה אוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר אוֹ בֵיצָה הָיָה אוֹמֵר אֲשֶׁר בָּרָא נְפָשׁוֹת רַבּוֹת לְהַחֲיוֹת בָּהֶן נֶפֶשׁ כָּל חַי. בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה יי חַי הָעוֹלָמִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Abba bar Jacob in the name of the great Rebbi Isaac⁸¹: 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.⁸² footnotes: ⁸¹ He 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.] ⁸² If the vocalization is חֵי הָעוֹלָמִים (rejected by Maimonides), the translation would be: “Eternally living.” ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:20 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:20) עַד כְּדוֹן בְּסוֹף. בִּתְחִילָּה אָמַר רִבִּי חַגַּיי בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. הָתִיב רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְהָא מַתְנִיתָא פְלִיגָא. עַל הַחוֹמֶץ וְעַל הַגּוֹבָיי וְעַל הַנּוֹבְלוֹת הוּא אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. וְהָדֵין גּוֹבָיי לֹא מִין נֶפֶשׁ הוּא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 thing⁸³? footnotes: ⁸³ The 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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:21 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:21) אַתְיָא דְרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חֲסִידָא כְּרִבִּי וְדִבְרֵי שְׁנֵיהֶן כְּרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. דְּתַנִּי זֶה הַכְּלָל שֶׁהָיָה רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל כָּל שֶׁהוּא מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה וְאֵינוֹ מִמִּין דָּגָן מִין דָּגָן וְלֹא אָפָאוֹ פַּת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מְבָרֵךְ לְאַחֲרָיו שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים בְּרָכָה אַחַת. וְכָל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה וְלֹא מִמִּין דָּגָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מְבָרֵךְ לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים לְפָנֶיהָ וְלֹא לְאַחֲרֶיהָ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** The statement of Rebbi Simeon the pious⁸⁴ turns out like that of Rebbi⁸⁵ and both of them like Rabban Gamliel⁸⁶ 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 flour⁸⁷ 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 after⁸⁸.” footnotes: ⁸⁴ He 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. ⁸⁵ He requires a final doxology from “Creator of many living things.” ⁸⁶ The second statement of his is in Tosephta Berakhot ⁸⁷ Including grain flour that is not enumerated in the verse, e. g., rye and spelt. ⁸⁸ Meaning “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. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:22 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:22) רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אִידִי בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי חֲנִינָא כָּל שֶׁהוּא כְּעֵין סוֹלֶת וּכְעֵין חֲלִיטָה וּמֵחֲמֵשֶׁת הַמִּינִין אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי מְזוֹנוֹת וּמְבָרֵךְ לְאַחֲרֶיהָ בְּרָכָה אַחַת מֵעֵין שָׁלֹשׁ. וְכָל שֶׁהוּא כְעֵין סוֹלֶת וּכְעֵין חֲלִיטָה וְאֵינוֹ מֵחֲמֵשֶׁת הַמִּינִין. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה שָׁלַח רַב זְעוּרָא גַּב אִילֵּין דְּבֵית רִבִּי יַנַּאי וְאָ‍מְרוּן לִי. לֵית אֲנָא יְדַע מַה אָ‍מְרוּן לִי. מִי כְדוֹן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי מִסְתַּבְּרָא שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָּעֵי הָדֵין דְּאָכַל סוֹלֶת מַהוּ לְמִיבְרְכָה בְּסוֹפָהּ. אֲמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְהָכֵן לָא אֲכַל רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה סוֹלֶת מִן יוֹמוֹי. לֵית צוֹרְכָה דְּאִי לֹא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** 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 Kinds⁸⁹ 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 Yannai⁹⁰ 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.⁹¹” Rebbi Jeremiah inquired: He who ate cereal, what does he recite at the end⁹³? Rebbi Yose said, and therefore Rebbi Jeremiah never ate any cereal⁹⁴. That is the only one thing about which he was in doubt⁹⁵. footnotes: ⁸⁹ The five kinds of flour that are admissible for matzot ⁹⁰ Still existing two generations after the death of Rebbi Yannai. ⁹¹ The catch-all for all food not covered by anything else and that will allow one to eat all foods. ⁹³ “One benediction imitating three” or “Creator of many living things.” ⁹⁴ Except in a meal that was covered by the benediction over bread at the start and Grace afterwards. ⁹⁵ צורכא, a technical expression, frequent in the Yerushalmi in this sense, and difficult to translate verbally. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:23 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:23) לָמָּה הוּא חוֹתֵם בָּהּ בָּאָרֶץ. נַעֲשֵׂית כְּבִרְכַּת פּוֹעֲלִים. דְּתַנִּי הַפּוֹעֲלִים שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹשִׂין מְלָאכָה עִם בַּעַל הַבַּיִת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְבָ‍רְכִין בְּרָכָה רִאשׁוֹנָה וְכוֹלְלִין שֶׁל יְרוּשָׁלַםִ בְּשֶׁל אָרֶץ וְחוֹתְמִין בְּשֶׁל אָרֶץ. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ עוֹשִׂין עִמּוֹ בִּסְעוּדָן אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה בַּעַל הַבַּיִת אוֹכֵל עִמָּהֶן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְבָ‍רְכִין אַרְבַּע. דְּבֵית רִבִּי יַנַּאי עָ‍בְדִין לָהּ כְּמַטְבֵּעַ בְרָכָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Why does one finish⁹⁶ with “the Land”? It is similar to Grace for day laborers. As has been stated⁹⁷ 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 food⁹⁸ 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 benediction⁹⁹. footnotes: ⁹⁶ The “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).” ⁹⁷ Tosephta Berakhot ⁹⁸ Without any cash payments the employer is legally required to give them time for full standard Grace. ⁹⁹ They formulated the fixed “benediction imitating three” and did not tolerate any deviation. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:24 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:24) מַהוּ לְהַזְכִּיר בָּהּ מֵעֵין הַמְּאוֹרָע. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר זְמִינָא רִבִּי זְעִירָא הֲוָה מַזְכִּיר בָּהּ מֵעֵין הַמְּאוֹרָע. אָמַר רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה הוֹאִיל וְחָשׁ לָהּ רִבִי זְעִירָא צְרִיכִין אָנוּ מֵיחוּשׁ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Does one have to mention in it the occasion¹⁰⁰? 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 notice¹⁰¹. footnotes: ¹⁰⁰ Does one have to mention the Sabbath, holidays, and the days of the New Moon in the “benediction imitating three”? ¹⁰¹ Hence, 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). ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:25 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:25) תַּנִּי מְבָ‍רְכִין עַל הַדָּגָן כְּשֶׁהוּא מִן הַמּוּבְחָר. קָלּוּסְקִין וּשְׁלֵימָה שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת אוֹמֵר עַל הַקָּלּוּסְקִין. פְּרוּסָה שֶׁל קָלּוּסְקִין וּשְׁלֵימָה שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת אוֹמֵר עַל הַשְּׁלֵימָה שֶׁל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת. פַּת חִיטִּין וּפַת שְׂעוֹרִין אוֹמֵר עַל שֶׁל חִיטִּין. פְּרוּסָה שֶׁל חִטִּים וּשְׁלֵימָה שֶׁל שְעוֹרִים אוֹמֵר עַל הַפְּרוּסָה שֶׁל חִטִּין. פַּת שְׂעוֹרִין וּפַת כּוּסְמִין אוֹמֵר עַל שֶׁל שְׂעוֹרִין. וַהֲלֹא שֶׁל כּוּסְמִין יָפָה מִמֶּנָּה. אֶלָּא שֶׁזּוּ מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה וְזוּ אֵין מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעוּרָא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה הִיא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה אָמַר אִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. פַּת טְמֵאָה וּפַת טְהוֹרָה רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר וָוא אָמַר אוֹמֵר עַל הַטְּהוֹרָה. פַּת נְקִיָיה טְמֵאָה וּפַת קִיבָר טְהוֹרָה. רִבִּי חִיָיא בַּר אָדָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אָחָא עַל אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה יְבָרֵךְ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** It has been stated¹⁰² 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. Rolls¹⁰³ 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 is¹⁰⁴ 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 one¹⁰⁵. Impure white bread and pure coarse¹⁰⁶(*panis*) “coarse bread.” bread, Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: He may recite on the one that he prefers¹⁰⁷. footnotes: ¹⁰² Tosephta Berakhot ¹⁰³ Greek, singular κόλλιξ, “roll”. ¹⁰⁴ On 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. ¹⁰⁵ In 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. ¹⁰⁶ Levy declares it to be from Greek κυρηβία, τά (plur.) “bran, shells of grain kernels,” Krauss and Löw from cibarius ¹⁰⁷ Since each one has good and bad qualities. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:26 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:1:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:1:26) קוֹרָא רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל אוֹמֵר עָלָיו בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ. תַּנָּא רִבִּי חֲלַפְתָּא בֶּן שָׁאוּל שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. תַּנִּי רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בּוֹרֵא מִינֵי דְּשָָׁאִים. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרִבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא פְּלִיגָא עִילוֹי וְאֵילּוּ הֵן מִינֵי דְּשָׁאִים הַקִּינַרַס וְהַחֲלִימָה וְהַדְּמוּעַ וְהָאָטָד. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Young palm shoots. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel: He recites on it “Creator of the fruit of the tree¹⁰⁸.” Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Saul stated, “By Whose word everything was created¹⁰⁹.” Rebbi Joshua stated: “Creator of kinds of grasses.¹¹⁰” The *baraita* of Rebbi Oshaiah disagrees: “The following are the kinds of grasses: artichoke¹¹¹, *ḥalimah*¹¹², 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”., *demua*¹¹³, and lycium¹¹⁴. footnotes: ¹⁰⁸ In 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. ¹⁰⁹ This 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. ¹¹⁰ This 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” ¹¹¹ Greek κυνάρα, κινάρα. ¹¹² This plant is defined by Arukh ¹¹³ An otherwise unknown grassy plant; the corresponding Arabic word دماع is explained in classical Arabic dictionaries as “seemingly the name of a plant.” ¹¹⁴ A spiny plant frequent in the Jordan valley. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:2:1) **משנה:** בֵּירַךְ עַל פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה יָצָא. עַל פֵּירוֹת הָאֲדָמָה בּוֹרֵא פְּרִי הָעֵץ לֹא יָצָא. וְעַל כּוּלָּם אִם אָמַר שֶׁהַכֹּל יָצָא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If he pronounced the benediction “Creator of the fruit of the soil” on fruits of the tree, he has fulfilled his obligation, on fruits of the soil “Creator of the fruit of the tree”, he has not fulfilled his obligation. On all of them if he pronounced “everything was created¹¹⁶”, he has fulfilled his obligation. footnotes: ¹¹⁶ “By Whose word everything was created.” While this is not the preferred benediction, the statement is true and therefore admissible. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:2:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָה הִיא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָא עֲבִיד אֶת הָאִילָנוֹת כְּקַשִּׁים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא פֵּירוֹת הָאִילָן בִּכְלַל פֵּירוֹת הָאֲדָמָה. וְאֵין פֵּירוֹת הָאֲדָמָה בִּכְלַל פֵּירוֹת הָעֵץ. רַב הוּנָא אָמַר חוּץ מִן הַיַּיִן וּמִן הַפַּת. מַתְנִיתָא אָמְרָה כֵן חוּץ מִן הַיַּיִן שֶׁעַל הַיַּיִן הוּא אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא פְרִי הַגֶּפֶן. חוּץ מִן הַפַּת שֶׁעַל הַפַּת הוּא אוֹמֵר הַמּוֹצִיא לֶחֶם מִן הָאָרֶץ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: This is Rebbi Yehuda’s since Rebbi Yehudah makes trees like straws¹¹⁷ 1:8 which states that if a tree was felled, its owner may not bring the first fruits of that tree to the Temple, but Rebbi Yehudah insists that he may. Since everybody agrees that grain may be offered as first-fruits, and grain can be brought only after it was cut and separated from the straw, it follows that Rebbi Yehudah treats trees simply as stalks for their fruits.. Rebbi Yose said, it is everybody’s opinion since fruits of a tree are also fruits of the soil but fruits of the soil are not fruits of the tree¹¹⁸. Rav Huna said¹¹⁹, except for bread and wine. The Mishnah (6:1) says so: Except for wine because on wine one says “Creator of the fruit of the vine;” except for bread because on bread one says “He Who produces bread from the earth.” footnotes: ¹¹⁷ In the Babli (40a) this is the accepted opinion, in the name of Rav Naḥman. The proof is from Mishnah Bikkurim ¹¹⁸ In contrast to the opinion of the Tanna R. Yose quoted in the next paragraph, every true statement about food is acceptable. ¹¹⁹ Babli 40b. His opinion is rejected in the Babli in favor of a dissenting one of Rebbi Yoḥanan not mentioned in the Yerushalmi. The next paragraph, which relativizes the statement of Rav Huna, requires a separate benediction for bread even if it is not the one formulated by the Men of the Great Assembly. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:2:3) תַּנִּי רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר כָּל הַמְּשַׁנֶּה עַל הַמַּטְבֵּעַ שֶׁטָּבְעוּ חַכָמִים לֹא יָצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר כָּל שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּנֶּה מִבְּרִיָיתוֹ וְלֹא שִׁינָּה בִּרְכָתוֹ לֹא יָצָא. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אָמַר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁבָּרָא הַחֵפֶץ הַזֶּה. מַה נָאֶה הוּא זֶה יָצָא. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל הֲלָכָה כְּרִבִּי מֵאִיר. מִילְתֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמְרָה כֵן. חַד פַּרְסוֹי אָתָא לְגַבֵּי רַב בְּגִין דַּאֲנָא אֲכַל פִּיסָּתִי וְלָא אֲנָא חֲכִים מְבָרְכָא עָלֵיהּ וַאֲנָא אֲמַר בָּרוּךְ דְּבָרָא הָדֵין פִּסָּא נְפִיק אֲנָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתִי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** It has been stated¹²⁰ 4:5.: Rebbi Yose says, anyone who changes the formula established by the Sages did not fulfill his duty. Rebbi Yehudah says, everything that has been changed from the way it was created but one did not change its benediction, he did not fulfill his duty¹²¹ that the anonymous Mishnah should present the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah. In the parallel in the Babli (40b), Rebbi Yehudah’s opinion is not even quoted; in Babylonia only the opinions of Rebbi Yose (for those who know Hebrew) and of Rebbi Meïr (for the illiterate) are accepted.. Rebbi Meïr says, even if he says: “Praised be He Who created this property, how beautiful it is,” he has fulfilled his duty. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel: practice follows Rebbi Meïr. The words of Rav also say so. A Persian¹²² came before Rav: “Since I am eating my piece of bread, but I do not know how to recite the benediction over it, I use to say: ‘Praise to Him Who created this piece of bread,’ did I fulfill my duty?” He said to him: yes. footnotes: ¹²⁰ Tosephta Berakhot ¹²¹ Rebbi Yose accepts only the formulas established by the Men of the Great Assembly. Rebbi Yehudah accepts these formulas as guidelines which have to be adapted to varying circumstances and this adaptation is more important than using the approved formulas. The great number of different formulas of benediction in the Yerushalmi and fragments of Yerushalmi rite prayer books show that the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah was the dominant one in the Land of Israel. In staying with this attitude, it was even discussed at the start of this halakhah ¹²² A Persian Jew. In the Babli (40b), he is called Benjamin the shepherd. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:2:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:2:4) רַב יְהוּדָה בְשֵׁם אַבָּא בַּר בַּר חָנָה בַּר קַפָּרָא וּתְרֵין תַּלְמִידוֹי נִתְאָרְחוּ אֵצֶל בַּעַל הַבַּיִת בְּהָדֵין פּוּנְדָקָא דְּבִרְכָתָא אַפִּיק קוֹמֵיהוֹן פְּרָגִן וְאַחְוָנִיָיא וְקֵפַלוֹטִין. אָמְרֵי נְבָרֵךְ עַל קֵפַלוֹטָה דּוּ פָטַר אַחְוָנִיתָא וְלֹא פָטַר פְּרָגִיתָא. נְבָרֵךְ עַל אַחְוָנִיָיתָא לָא פָטַר לָא דֵין וְלָא דֵין. קָפַץ חַד וּבֵירַךְ עַל פְּרָגִיתָא שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. גָּחִיךְ לֵיהּ חַבְרֵיהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ בַּר קַפָּרָא לֹא לְזֶה גוֹרְגְּרָן אֶלָּא לָךְ לוֹגְלְגָן. זֶה עָשָׂה בְּגַרְגְּרָנוּתוֹ אַתָּה לָמָּה לִגְלַגְתָּה. וְלָזֶה אָמַר חָכָם אֵין כַּאן זָקֵן אֵין כַּאן. אָמְרוּ לֹא יָצְאָה שְׁנָתָן עַד שֶׁמֵּתוּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הָא אָזְלִינָן תְּרֵין וְלֹא שְׁמָעִינָן מִינָהּ כְּלוּם. מַיי כְדֵין מִסְתַּבְּרָא מְבָרֵךְ עַל הַקֶּפַלוֹט שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ טְפֵילָה לְיֶרֶק . **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rav Yehudah in the name of Abba bar bar Ḥana¹²⁴: Bar Qappara and two of his students were with the innkeeper at the “inn of blessings”. He brought before them partridge, orach¹²⁵, growing mainly in salt marshes, that was used as (relatively cheap) vegetable. [The identification of the plant (and of the bird species) is Rashi’s in the Babli, reported in the name of R. Isaac ben R. Yehudah of Worms.] The vegetable cannot be eaten raw, but must be cooked and, therefore, must have a changed benediction according to Rebbi Yehudah., and leeks¹²⁶ and the use of the word in Syriac.. They said, if we recite the benediction on leeks¹²⁷, it will serve also for orach but not for the partridge¹²⁸ mean that one may recite that benediction on anything that specifically needs it and then extend it to fruits and vegetables, only that if one recited the benediction on agricultural produce it also is valid, but not preferred.. If we recite on orach, it will not serve for anything else. One of them jumped the gun and recited “by Whose word everything was created” on the partridge. His colleague¹²⁹ laughed at him. Bar Qappara said to that one, not about that glutton but about you scoffer¹³⁰. This one acted in his gluttony, why did you laugh? And to the other one he said, is there no rabbi here, is there no old man here? They said, within a year they both died. Rebbi Yose said, there two are gone and we did not learn anything from the incident. What is it? It is reasonable that one recites the benediction on leeks because “By Whose word everything was created” is secondary for vegetables¹³¹. footnotes: ¹²⁴ He is Rabba bar bar Ḥana. A slightly different version is in Babli 39a as a tannaïtic statement. ¹²⁵ A salty plant, Atriplex rosea ¹²⁶ Greek κεφαλωτός, “having a head”. The identification as leeks is from Rashi in Babli Yom Ṭov ¹²⁷ It seems that these leeks were raw; hence, their benediction is “Creator of the fruit of the soil” and that will serve also for the cooked vegetable by the reasoning given in the Mishnah; however, a benediction over the cooked vegetable, which is a changed one following Rebbi Yehudah, cannot serve for raw leeks. ¹²⁸ The benediction for patridge is “everything.” The story makes two points. First, that in benedictions one did follow Rebbi Yehudah in frequently changing the wording of benedictions. [This principle, absent in the Babli, is the cause that the reports about and conclusions from this story in the two Talmudim are not comparable.] The second, more important one, is that the language of the Mishnah, “On all of them if he pronounced ‘everything’, he has fulfilled his obligation” does not ¹²⁹ The Aramaic text seems to have a scribal error for חַבְרֵיהּ. ¹³⁰ I am angry. ¹³¹ The meaning of the statement is that one should not start with the benediction over the quail because that benediction is also applicable to vegetables and, hence, cannot be recited a second time for the same meal without taking God’s name in vain. But, as explained earlier, the benediction “everything” is not valid for vegetables if recited on meat and, in any case, is undesirable for plants that have their own more specific benediction. Hence, the person reciting the benediction first on partridge cannot eat of the vegetables. On the other hand, if he makes the first benediction “Creator of the fruit of the soil” for the vegetables, then he can make a second benediction “that all was by His word” for the bird and all is fine. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:3:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:3:1) **משנה:** עַל דָּבָר שֶׁאֵין גִּידוּלָיו מִן הָאָרֶץ אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. עַל הַחוֹמֶץ וְעַל הַגּוֹבָיי וְעַל הַנּוֹבְלוֹת הוּא אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִדְבָרוֹ. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר כָּל שֶׁהוּא מִין קְלָלָה אֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** On food that is not grown on the soil one recites “that all was by His word.” On vinegar¹³², on locusts, and on wind-fall fruit one recites “that all was by His word.” Rebbi Yehudah says, one does not recite a benediction on a kind that comes from a curse. footnotes: ¹³² Vinegar which came from wine turned sour, not vinegar that was produced as such from the start. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:3:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:3:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:3:2) **הלכה:** הֶחְמִיץ יֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ דַּיָין הָאֱמֶת. בָּא לְאוֹכְלוֹ אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. רָאָה גּוֹבַיי אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ דַּיָין הָאֱמֶת. בָּא לְאוֹכְלָן אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. רָאָה נוֹבְלוֹת שֶׁנָּשְׁרוּ אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ דַּיָין הָאֱמֶת. בָּא לְאוֹכְלָן אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** If his wine turned sour, he recites “praise to the True Judge”¹³³. When he consumes it, he recites “that all was by His word.” If he sees a locust¹³⁴, he recites “praise to the True Judge”. When he consumes it, he recites “that all was by His word.” If he sees fallen fruit, he recites “praise to the True Judge”. When he consumes it, he recites “that all was by His word.” footnotes: ¹³³ The standard benediction on bad news, cf. Mishnah 9:6. ¹³⁴ The edible locusts come in swarms which destroy crops. Hence seeing one presages disaster. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:4:1) **משנה:** הָיוּ לְפָנָיו מִינִין הַרְבֶּה רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר אִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים עַל אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן שֶׁיִּרְצֶה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If there were many kinds before him¹³⁵, Rebbi Yehudah said, if among them is one of the Seven Kinds¹⁵ 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. that is the one over which he recites the benediction. But the Sages say, on any one that he wishes¹³⁶. footnotes: ¹³⁵ He wants to eat of all of them, they all require the same benediction, and he may recite one benediction only. ¹⁵ The Seven Kinds are “the fruits for which the Land of Israel is praised”, enumerated in Deut. ¹³⁶ The Babli (41a) interprets the Sages to mean that the fruit to be chosen for benediction should be the one that he likes best personally. It seems that the Yerushalmi means quite literally “any one that he wants”. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:4:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר מַה פְּלִיגִן רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרַבָּנָן. כְּשֶׁהָיָה בְדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת. אֲבָל אֵין בְּדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוֹיי שֶׁאִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּא צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּסוֹף. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הֲדָא דְּרִבִּי בָּא פְּלִיגָא עַל דְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי דְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר מַה פְּלִיגִין רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרַבָּנָן בְּשֶׁהָיָה בְדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת אֲבָל אִם אֵין בְּדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁאִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. וָמַר רִבִּי בָּא וְצָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּסוֹף לֹא בֵּירַךְ נַעֲשָׂה טְפֵילָה. דְּתַנִּינָן תַּמָּן כָּל שֶׁהוּא עִיקָּר וְעִמּוֹ טְפֵילָה מְבָרֵךְ עַל הָעִיקָּר וּפוֹטֵר אֶת הַטְּפֵילָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread¹³⁷, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards, everybody agrees that if among them one is of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction. Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end¹³⁸. Rebbi Yose said, the statement of Rebbi Abba disagrees with Rebbi Joshua ben Levi since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards everybody agrees that if among them is one of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction; but Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end. If he did not recite a benediction at the end it¹³⁹ became an accessory and we have stated there (Mishna 7): “In every situation where there is a main course and side dishes, one recites the benediction for the main course and thereby frees the side dishes.¹⁴⁰” footnotes: ¹³⁷ If the fruits are eaten as appetizers to be followed by a meal, then the benediction over bread for the main meal is a benediction over one of the Seven Kinds, even over the most important of the Seven Kinds. Hence, a benediction on some other fruit is no slight for the Land of Israel. But if the snack of fruits is not followed by bread and Grace after the meal then the fruits of the Land of Israel take precedence since they require at the end a “benediction imitating three benedictions” whereas other fruits only require the short benediction “Creator of living things” that earlier was considered to be “nothing”. ¹³⁸ Even if Grace is recited afterwards. ¹³⁹ The fruit eaten as appetizer. ¹⁴⁰ Hence, bread being the most important food and requiring recitation of full Grace, any fruit eaten beforehand becomes a side dish for the bread and should be covered by Grace. The Yerushalmi takes Mishnah 7 to apply also to benedictions after the meal, not only before the meal. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:4:3) הֲדָא גָרִיזְמָתָה רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אַמִּי מְבָרֵךְ עַל תּוּרְמוּסָה. אָמַר רִבִּי לֵוִי עַל שֵׁם אַל תִּגְזוֹל דָּל כִּי דַל הוּא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** *Garizmata*¹⁴¹ 9, *Thr. rabba* introduction) that it refers to a dessert. The *Arukh* translates the word by Italian קוציאי which Perles misread as *guscio* “trestle; shell, hull”. Even *coccio* “potsherd” does not make much sense. The older commentaries to the Yerushalmi were misled by a scribal “correction” in the *Arukh* that identified *gryzmth* with lupines, which refers to the next word in the text. Levy’s dictionary, following Perles, derives the word from a non-existing Greek word γαρίσμη [but compare γαρισκός, ὁ, “an unknown fish”, γάρος, ὁ “paste of brine and small fish”, γάρον, τὸ “fish sauce”.] Jastrow considers the word as Par‘el from (Hebrew and Arabic) גזם “to cut in pieces”. From the usage in the next Halakhah it seems that one speaks of baked, in contrast to cooked, goods. It is possible to connect the word with Arabic جردو, גרדם “to devour voraciously” (said of worms and other pests.) The background of the remark is that this kind of dessert at a formal dinner, being extraordinary and not part of a regular meal, is not covered by the benediction over the bread at the start of the meal and, hence, needs its own benediction.. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Ammi, he recites the benediction over the lupine¹⁴². Rebbi Levi said, because of (*Prov.* 22:22) “do not rob a poor one¹⁴³ because he is poor.” footnotes: ¹⁴¹ The exact meaning of the word, its vocalization and etymology are unknown. It is clear from Midrashim (Lev. rabba ¹⁴² He may make the benediction even on lupines even though they probably are the cheapest dish on the plate. ¹⁴³ Of its benediction. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:4:4) עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת. לֹא הָיָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכֹל פַּת לָא בְּדָה. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל זוּגָה סְלַק גַבֵּי אִילֵּין דְּבֵית רִבִּי יַנַּאי חַמַתְּהוּן נָסְבִין זֵיתָא וּמְבָרְכִין לְפָנָיו וּלְאַחֲרָיו. אֲמַר לוֹן וַעֲבְדִּין כְּדוֹן. רִבִּי זְעִירָא שָׁלַח שָׁאַל לְרִבִּי שְמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן רִבִי כֲּהָנָא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אֲבִינָא כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדֵיי שֶׁאִם יֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן מִמִּין שִׁבְעָה עָלָיו הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא וְיֵאוּת. מִן מַאן דַּאֲנָן חֲמִיָין רַבָּנָן סָלְקִין לְרֵישׁ יַרְחָא וְאָכְלִין עֲנָבִין וְלָא מְבָרְכִין בְּסוֹפָהּ. לֹא בְּשֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכוֹל פַּת. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** That is if it is his intention to eat bread¹⁴⁴. But if it is not his intention to eat bread, that does not apply. (Rabban) Gamliel the twin¹⁴⁵ went to those of the house of Rebbi Yannai. He saw them eat an olive¹⁴⁶ and recite the benediction before and afterwards. He said to them: Does one do that? Rebbi Zeïra sent and asked Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman. Rebbi Cahana¹⁴⁷ in the name of Rebbi Avina¹⁴⁸: Everybody agrees that if among them was one of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction. Rebbi Zeïra said, that must be correct, since we see the rabbis assembling for the proclamation of the New Moon and eat grapes but they do not recite a benediction afterwards. That is because it is his¹⁴⁹ intention to eat bread. footnotes: ¹⁴⁴ One returns to the opinion of the Sages in the Mishnah and the interpretation given by R. Joshua ben Levi. ¹⁴⁵ The name of his twin brother was Hillel. He was an Amora of the third generation who usually appears asking questions from his contemporaries, not formulating his own rules. The title “Rabban” was given to him here by a thoughtless scribe; everywhere else his name appears without title. ¹⁴⁶ As an appetizer before a meal with bread. ¹⁴⁷ Rebbi Cohen at other places in the Talmud. ¹⁴⁸ A student of Ganiva, also of Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah, who immigrated into Israel and was ordained in the Yeshivah of Rebbi Ammi. ¹⁴⁹ It is their intention to have a full meal after the formal proclamation of the New Moon. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:4:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:4:5) הָיוּ לְפָנָיו מִינִין שִׁבְעָה עַל אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם לְמִקְרָא קוֹדֵם לִבְרָכָה וְכָל הַסָּמוּךְ לָאָרֶץ קוֹדֵם לַכֹּל. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** If there were before him of the Seven Kinds, on which one does he recite the benediction? There¹⁵⁰ they say: Everything that has precedence in the verse has precedence for benediction and everything that is close to “the Land” has precedence over everything else¹⁵¹ 8:6): “A land of (1) wheat and (2) barley, (3) grapes, and (4) figs, and (5) pomegranates; a land of (1) oil olives and (2) date honey.. footnotes: ¹⁵⁰ In Babylonia; Babli 41a. ¹⁵¹ Hence, the orders of preference are (Deut. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:5:1) **משנה:** בֵּירַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן פָּטַר אֶת הַיַּיִן שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. בֵּירַךְ עַל הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן פָּטַר אֶת הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. בֵּירַךְ עַל הַפַּת פָּטַר אֶת הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת. בֵּירַךְ עַל הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת לֹא פָּטַר אֶת הַפַּת. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים אַף לֹא מַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵירָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If one recited the benediction on wine before the meal¹⁵², he also covers wine after the meal. If one recited the benediction on little pieces¹⁵³ form of פרר. This is the opinion of the dictionaries. It is more likely that פרפרת is derived from παραφέρω “to serve, bring to one’s side” (food), or the passive “set on table, served” (definitions of Liddell Scott). The correct translation then is “side dish before or after meal; appetizer or dessert, snacks.” The vocalization should be פָּרָפֶרֶת (E. G.). before the meal, he also covers little pieces after the meal. If one recited the benediction on bread, he also covers little pieces; if one recited the benediction on little pieces, he did not cover bread; the House of Shammai say, neither did he cover cooked food. footnotes: ¹⁵² Given as an appetizer. They drank wine after the main meal but before Grace was recited. Since Grace covers all food, it is obvious that anything consumed after Grace needs a new benediction. Both wine and cookies were served before and after the meal only on festive dinners as explained in Chapter 8; they do not belong to everyday meals. Their rules need to be spelled out. ¹⁵³ The verb פרר means “to break into little pieces, crumble”. It is possible that פרפר is a pilpel ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:5:2) **הלכה:** אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא לֹא תַנִּינָן אֶלָּא בֵּירַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן פָּטַר אֶת הַיַּיִן שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. אֲבָל אִם בֵּירַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁבְּתוֹךְ הַמָּזוֹן לֹא פָטַר אֶת הַיַּיִן שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. תַּמָּן אָמְרִין אֲפִילוּ בֵּירַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן לֹא פָטַר אֶת הַיַּיִן שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. וְהָא תַנִּינָן בֵּירַךְ עַל הַיַּיִן שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמָּזוֹן פָּטַר אֶת הַיַּיִן שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. רַב הוּנָא וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. [חַד אֲמַר] בְּהָדֵין דְּשָׁתִי קוֹנְדִּיטוֹן. וְחָרָנָה אֲמַר בְּהָדֵין דְּשָׁתִי חֲמָר בָּתַר בַּילְנֵי. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rav Ḥisda said, we stated only “if one recited the benediction on wine before the meal, he also covers wine after the meal”, but if one recited the benediction for wine during the meal¹⁵⁵, he did not cover the wine after the meal. There¹⁵⁶ they say, even if one recited the benediction on wine before the meal, he did not cover wine after the meal. But did we not state “if one recited the benediction on wine before the meal, he also covers wine after the meal”? Rav Huna and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, one of them said, if he drank spiced wine¹⁵⁷ (scil., *vinum*); this wine cannot be compared to regular wine and therefore needs an extra benediction., the other one said, if he drank wine after the bath¹⁵⁸ (plur.), a sauna. Since the first wine after return from the sauna is taken for medical reasons, its benediction does not cover wine consumed as food.. footnotes: ¹⁵⁵ When wine serves only to wash down the food. But wine after the meal is consumed for its own sake. ¹⁵⁶ In Babylonia, where wine was a rarity and only used on Sabbath and holidays. Their usual drink was beer made from date syrup. The entire discussion is Babylonian, cf. Babli 42b. ¹⁵⁷ Latin conditum ¹⁵⁸ Latin balnea, -orum ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:5:3) רִבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ רַב הוּנָא רַב בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי חִיָיא רוּבָּא פַּת הַבָּאָה כִּיסְנִין אַחַר הַמָּזוֹן טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ. אָמַר רִבִּי אַמִּי רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן פְּלִיג. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא לְרִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה בְּמַה הוּא פְלִיג. כְּשֶׁאָכַל מֵאוֹתוֹ הַמָּזוֹן בְּאֶמְצַע הַמָּזוֹן. אָמַר לֵיהּ אֲפִילוּ לֹא אָכַל מֵאוֹתוֹ הַמִּין בְּאֶמְצַע הַמָּזוֹן. אָתָא רַב חַגַּי בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא אֲפִילוּ לֹא אָכַל מֵאוֹתוֹ הַמִּין בְּאֶמְצַע הַמָּזוֹן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Huna, Rav, in the name of the great Rebbi Ḥiyya: Bread that comes *kisnīn*¹⁵⁹-bread is called כעכ in Arabic. This is “pastry, small baked goods” in common Arabic, “donuts” in Syrian dialect. Rabbenu Ḥananel and Rashi explain that it is a baked shell filled with candied almonds and other nuts. Since it is baked it needs a benediction, but since it is not baked as bread it is not covered by the benediction over bread. The Babli (42a) quotes only the opinion of Samuel who seems to agree with Rebbi Yoḥanan here. needs a benediction before and after. Rebbi Ammi said that Rebbi Yoḥanan disagrees. Rebbi Mana asked Rebbi Ḥizqiah, in what does he disagree? When one ate from the same food¹⁶⁰ during the meal? He said to him, even if one did not eat from the same kind during the meal. Rav Ḥaggai came in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: Even if one did not eat from the same kind during the meal¹⁶¹. footnotes: ¹⁵⁹ Rav Hai Gaon explains that kisnīn ¹⁶⁰ The Rome ms. has here המין, conforming to the next two sentences. ¹⁶¹ Any baked goods eaten after the benediction over bread and before Grace are covered by these two benedictions. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:5:4) אָמַר רִבִּי חֲנִינָא בַּר סִיסַיי הֲוּן אִילֵּין דִּנְשִׂיָיא מְשַׁלְּחִין לֵיהּ נִיקָלַוְוסִין וַהֲוָה שְׁבַק לוֹן בָּתָר מְזוֹנֵיהּ וּמְבָרֵךְ עֲלֵיהֶן תְּחִילָּה וְסוֹף. רַב חוּנָה אָכַל תְּמָרִין עִם פִּיסָּתֵיהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ רַב חִיָיא בַּר אַשִּׁי פְּלִיג אַתּ עַל רַבָּךְ שׁוֹבְקִין בָּתָר מְזוֹנָךְ וְאַתְּ מְבָרֵךְ עֲלֵיהֶן תְּחִילָּה וְסוֹף. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִינִּין אִנִּין עִיקָּר נְגִיסָּתִי. רִבִּי יוֹנָה וְרִבִּי יוֹסֵי סָלְקוּן לְמִישְׁתִּיתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי חֲנִינָא עֵנְתָּנָיָיה אַפִּיק קוֹמֵיהוֹן פַּת הַבָּאָה בְכִיסְנִין לְאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן. אָמְרִין נִישְׁבּוֹק אוּלְפָּנָה וְנֵיתֵי לָן לְמַתְנִיתָא. דְּתַנִּי רִבִּי מָנָא אָמַר מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי יוּדָה שֶׁאָמַר מִשּׁוּם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגָּלִילִי פַּת הַבָּאָה כִּיסְנִין לְאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן טְעוּנָה בְרָכָה לְפָנֶיהָ וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ. אָמְרֵי מִכֵּיוָן דְּהֵן יְחִידָיֵי וְרַבָּנָן פְּלִיגִין עֲלוֹי נַעֲבִיד כְּרַבָּנָן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** From the Patriarch they sent Nicolaus dates¹⁶² to Rebbi Ḥanina bar Sisai¹⁶³. He left them for dessert after his meal and recited a benediction over them before and after. Rav Ḥuna ate dates with his bread. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said to him, are you disagreeing with your teacher¹⁶⁴? Leave them for dessert after your meal and you may recite a benediction over them before and after. He said to him, they are the main thing my teeth get to bite. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose went to the marriage feast of Rebbi Ḥanina Eyntanaya. They brought before them *kisnīn* bread after the meal. They said, let us leave our learning and let us bring a *baraita*: Rebbi Mana stated in the name of Rebbi Yehudah, who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean: Bread that comes *kisnīn* after the meal needs a benediction before and after. They said, since they are the minority and the rabbis disagree with them, let us act following the rabbis¹⁶⁵. footnotes: ¹⁶² A kind of large Syrian dates, in Arabic אַנקִילַא. ¹⁶³ He is also called Ininai bar Sisai (in the Yerushalmi) and Anani bar Sason (in the Babli); Amora of the second generation and student of Rebbi Ḥanina. ¹⁶⁴ Rav, who said that food eaten after the main meal, without bread, needs separate benedictions. ¹⁶⁵ That bread covers all food which comes regularly with a meal, whether during the main course or as a dessert. This, as report of an action, is the final decision in the matter. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:5:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:5:5) אֲמַר מָרִינוֹס בֵּי רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֲהֵן אֲכַל גָּרִיזְמִי וְסֻלִית אַף עַל גַּב דְּהוּא מְבָרֵךְ עַל גָּרִיזְמָתָה בְּסוֹפָהּ לֹא פָטַר סוּלְתָא. מַה כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר אַף לֹא מַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵרָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הִיא. בֵּירַךְ עַל הַפַּת פָּטַר אֶת הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת וְאֶת מַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵירָה. כְּדִבְרֵי בֵּית הִלֵּל. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים לֹא פָטַר אֶת מַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵירָה. אֲבָל אִם בֵּירַךְ עַל הַפַּרְפֶּרֶת תְּחִילָּה כָּל עַמָּא מוֹדוֹי דְּלֹא פָטַר אֶת הַפַּת וְלֹא מַעֲשֵׂה קְדֵירָה. רִבִּי אַבָּא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי פַּפַּי בְּעִי. אֲהֵן דְּאָכַל סוֹלֶת וּבְדַעְתֵּיהּ מֵיכוֹל פִּיתָּא מַהוּ מְבָרְכָה עַל סוּלְתָא בְּסוֹפָהּ. רַבָּנָן דְּקֵיסַרִין פַּשְׁטִין לָהּ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ בְּסוֹף. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** Marinos, the son of Rebbi Joshua¹⁶⁶ said: He who ate dessert¹⁴¹ 9, *Thr. rabba* introduction) that it refers to a dessert. The *Arukh* translates the word by Italian קוציאי which Perles misread as *guscio* “trestle; shell, hull”. Even *coccio* “potsherd” does not make much sense. The older commentaries to the Yerushalmi were misled by a scribal “correction” in the *Arukh* that identified *gryzmth* with lupines, which refers to the next word in the text. Levy’s dictionary, following Perles, derives the word from a non-existing Greek word γαρίσμη [but compare γαρισκός, ὁ, “an unknown fish”, γάρος, ὁ “paste of brine and small fish”, γάρον, τὸ “fish sauce”.] Jastrow considers the word as Par‘el from (Hebrew and Arabic) גזם “to cut in pieces”. From the usage in the next Halakhah it seems that one speaks of baked, in contrast to cooked, goods. It is possible to connect the word with Arabic جردو, גרדם “to devour voraciously” (said of worms and other pests.) The background of the remark is that this kind of dessert at a formal dinner, being extraordinary and not part of a regular meal, is not covered by the benediction over the bread at the start of the meal and, hence, needs its own benediction. and cereal¹⁶⁷, even though he recites a benediction on the dessert at the end, he did not cover cereal¹⁶⁸. Is he like the House of Shammai, since the House of Shammai say¹⁶⁹, “neither cooked food?” Rebbi Yose said, this is everybody’s opinion. If one recited the benediction on bread, he also covers little pieces and cooked food; the House of Shammai say, neither did he cover cooked food. But if one first recited the benediction over little pieces, everybody agrees that he covered neither bread nor cooked food¹⁷⁰. Rebbi Abba, the son of Rebbi Ḥaggai asked: He who ate cereal and he has the intention of later eating bread, does he have to recite a separate benediction for cereal at the end? The rabbis of Caesarea find it obvious that he has to recite a separate benediction at the end¹⁷¹ 16a) as making fun of “those stupid Babylonians who eat bread with bread” because they eat bread with cereal. Hence, in Caesarea, someone eating cereal is not presumed to have the intention to eat bread.. footnotes: ¹⁶⁶ At other places in the Yerushalmi, he is called Marinos, the son of the great Rebbi Oshayah; an Israeli Amora between the first and second generations. ¹⁴¹ The exact meaning of the word, its vocalization and etymology are unknown. It is clear from Midrashim (Lev. rabba ¹⁶⁷ Cereal made from flour or flakes of grain that can be used to make bread. ¹⁶⁸ Since vegetable dessert needs only a short benediction afterwards but cereal needs a “benediction imitating three.” ¹⁶⁹ In the Mishnah. Except if it is explicitly stated, practice never follows the House of Shammai; Marinos should not follow it. ¹⁷⁰ They need the “benediction imitating three.” The Yerushalmi takes it as obvious that the remark on the House of Shammai refers to the sentence just preceding their remark. In the Babli (42b) it remains undecided whether the House of Shammai refer to the first or the second clause in the Mishnah. ¹⁷¹ In Israel, one never ate cereal with bread. R. Zeïra (himself a native Babylonian) is quoted in the Babli (Beẓa ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:1) **משנה:** הָיוּ יוֹשְׁבִין כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. הֵיסֵיבוּ אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְכוּלָּן. בָּא לָהֶן יַיִן בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּזוֹן כָּל אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ לְאַחַר הַמָּזוֹן אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְכוּלָּן. וְאוֹמֵר עַל הַמּוּגְמָר. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If they were sitting¹⁷², every one makes the benediction for himself¹⁷³. If they were lying on couches¹⁷⁴, one would make the benediction for everybody¹⁷⁵. If wine were served to them in the middle of the meal, everyone would make the benediction for himself¹⁷⁶; after the meal one person makes the benediction for everybody, and he makes the benediction on *mugmar*¹⁷⁷ are spices or incense roasted on burning coals, used as air-freshener after a meal and also to perfume garments.. footnotes: ¹⁷² In a sitting room, not in a dining room, either for talk or before a meal. (Some Mishnah manuscripts have “sitting before a meal” but the addition seems irrelevant.) In Mishnaic times, a formal meal was always taken lying down on couches, supporting oneself with one’s left arm and eating with the right hand. ¹⁷³ For wine, pastries, or fruit. ¹⁷⁴ Assembled to eat a meal as a company. ¹⁷⁵ On bread and/or wine. The other participants must answer “Amen” so that the benediction is counted also for them. ¹⁷⁶ Since people may be eating, their mouth is not free to answer “Amen”. ¹⁷⁷ The Hebrew verb גּמּר, Arabic גַמַּרַ, means “to roast on burning coals”. Mugmar ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר בִּשְׁבוּעַ הַבֵּן הִיא מַתְנִיתָא. הָא בַּעַל הַבַּיִת בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ לֹא. תַּנִּי רִבִּי חִיָיא אֲפִילוּ בַּעַל הַבַּיִת בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, the Mishnah deals with a party for circumcision¹⁷⁸. Hence, it does not apply to a man in his own house¹⁷⁹. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated¹⁸⁰ He allows a common benediction only in a formal dining room. The disagreement between him and R. Joshua ben Levi is not resolved; both are authorities of equal standing., even a man in his own house. footnotes: ¹⁷⁸ And similar festive occasions when a formal dinner takes place. ¹⁷⁹ Since all members of the household look to the head of the house to start the meal, he should make the benediction for all of them even if they are sitting and not reclining, since not every apartment has a formal dining room. ¹⁸⁰ In one of his baraitot. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:3) תַּנִּי סֵדֶר סְעוּדָה אוֹרְחִין נִכְנָסִין וְיוֹשְׁבִין עַל הַסַּפְסָלִין וְעַל הַקַּתֶדְרָיוֹת עַד שֶׁכּוּלָּן מִתְכַּנְּסִין. הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶן יַיִן כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶן לְיָדַיִם כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד נוֹטֵל יָדוֹ אַחַת. הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶן פַּרְפֶּרֶת כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. עָלוּ וְהֵיסֵבוּ הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶן יַיִן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבֵּירַךְ עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ עַל הַשֵּׁנִי. וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ עַל יְדֵי כּוּלָּם. הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶן לְיָדַיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנָּטַל יָדוֹ אַחַת צָרִיךְ לִיטוֹל שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו. הֵבִיאוּ לָהֶם פַּרְפֶּרֶת אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ עַל יְדֵי כוּלָּן. וְאֵין רְשׁוּת לְאוֹרֵחַ לִיכָּנֵס אַחַר שָׁלֹשׁ פַּרְפְּרָאוֹת. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** It was stated¹⁸¹ 4:8; Babli 43a. This Tosephta explains the background of the Mishnah.: The order of a formal meal: Guests enter and sit on low benches¹⁸². or on chairs¹⁸³ until all of them are assembled. They are served wine; everyone makes the benediction for himself. They bringthem water, everyone washes one hand. They bring them snacks, everyone makes the benediction for himself. When they entered¹⁸⁴ and lie down on couches they are served wine; even though one made the benediction on the first one, he must now make the benediction on the second one; one of them makes the benediction for all of them. They bring them water; even though one had washed one hand, he now has to wash both hands. When they are served snacks, one makes the benediction for all of them. No guest may enter after three servings of snacks. footnotes: ¹⁸¹ Tosephta Berakhot ¹⁸² Latin subsellium ¹⁸³ Greek καθέδρα. ¹⁸⁴ The dining room. הסב means “to lie on couches” in Mishnaic Hebrew. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:4 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:4) תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן סוּכָּה שִׁבְעָה כֵּיצַד. גָּמַר מִלֶּאֱכוֹל לֹא יַתִּיר אֶת סוּכָּתוֹ אֲבָל מוֹרִיד הוּא אֶת הַכֵּלִים מִן הַמִּנְחָה וּלְמַעֲלָה בִּשְׁבִיל כְּבוֹד יוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן. רִבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כַּהֲנָא רַב חִיָיא בַּר אַשִּׁי בְּשֵׁם רַב צָרִיךְ אָדָם לִפְסוֹל סוּכָּתוֹ מִבְּעוֹד יוֹם. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר צָרִיךְ לְקַדֵּשׁ בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְּשֵׁם שְׁמוּאֵל קִידֵּשׁ בְּבַיִת זֶה וְנִמְלַךְ לֶאֱכוֹל בְּבַיִת אַחֵר צָרִיךְ לְקַדֵּשׁ. רִבִּי אָחָא רִבִּי חִינְנָא בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי [הוֹשַׁעְיָא] מִי שֶׁסּוּכָּתוֹ עָרֵיבָה עָלָיו מְקַדֵּשׁ לֵילֵי יוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ וְעוֹלֶה וְאוֹכֵל בְּתוֹךְ סוּכָּתוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין וְלֹא פְּלִיגִין. מַה דָּמַר רַב בְּשֶׁלֹּא הָיָה בְדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכוֹל בְּבַיִת אַחֵר. וּמַה דָּמַר שְׁמוּאֵל בְּשֶׁהָיָה בְדַעְתּוֹ לֶאֱכוֹל בְּבַיִת אַחֵר. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא אַתְיָא דִשְׁמוּאֵל כְּרִבִּי חִיָיא וּדְרִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָא כְּרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. אָמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי זֹאת אוֹמֶרֶת שֶׁנֶּחְלָקִין בַּפֵּירוֹת. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** There (Mishnah *Sukkah* 4:5) we have stated: “Sukkah seven days, how is this¹⁸⁵, is an additional festive day, where the obligation to live in a *sukkah* does not apply. Since one may not add to the commandments of the Torah (*Deut.* 13:1), in Israel, where holidays are only one day, one may not live in the *sukkah* on the eighth day.? If he finished to eat he should not take down his *sukkah*¹⁸⁶ extends until nightfall of the eighth day., but he takes out the vessels starting from the time of afternoon prayers because of the honor due to the last holiday.” Rebbi Abba bar Cahana, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: A person must make his *sukkah* invalid¹⁸⁷. At the end of the discussion, the interpretation is that one must make the *sukkah* invalid as *sukkah* only if one intends to eat in the *sukkah* during the holiday of *Shemini Aẓeret*. One makes the *sukkah* invalid either by removing some of the roofing, or by putting up a sheet of cloth under the roofing, or in a similar way. as long as it is still day. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, a person must make *Qiddush*¹⁸⁸ inside his house¹⁸⁹, irrespective of the place of the meal.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Samuel: If one made *Qiddush* in one house and changed his mind to eat in another house he must make *Qiddush*¹⁹⁰ 101a that “there cannot be *Qiddush* except at the place of the holiday meal.”. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah¹⁹¹ 4:5: Rebbi Hoshaiah in the name of Rav. In the sequel, this statement will be referred to either as Rebbi Hoshaiah’s or Rav’s.: He who loves his *sukkah* makes *Qiddush* of the last holiday in his house and goes to eat in his *sukkah*¹⁹² must be said at the place of the meal.. Rebbi Abun said, they do not disagree. What Rav said was, if he did not have the intention to eat in another house¹⁹³, his intention was valid; a valid benediction cannot be voided retroactively.. But what Samuel said was if he had the intention to eat in another house. Rebbi Mana said¹⁹⁴ invalid before the start of the eighth day if one wants to use it during that day; hence, if Rebbi Hoshaiah requires in Rav’s name that one make *Qiddush* in the house it is obvious that he had the prior intention to eat in the *sukkah*. Hence, Rav must disagree with Samuel. If Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi made his statement without reference to Rav we may refer to the Babli (*Pesaḥim* 100b) that Rav disagrees explicitly with Samuel but that Rav Huna, Rav’s foremost student, agrees with Samuel. Rav Huna would not have gone against Rav if not at least one of the latter’s colleagues in his Yeshivah, e. g., Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi, had supported Samuel. Hence, the attribution of the statement of Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi to Rav seems to be in error, even though it is supported by both manuscripts of the Yerushalmi., Samuel comes like Rebbi¹⁹⁵ he must require that *Qiddush* be in that invalid *sukkah*. Ḥiyya and Rebbi Hoshaiah like Rebbi Joshua ben Levi¹⁹⁶ in the house and then continue eating and drinking wine in the *sukkah*. This means that one may start drinking wine at one place and then continue drinking at another place without reciting a new benediction. This contradicts the previous Tosephta that the benediction over wine in the sitting room does not free one from reciting a new benediction in the dining room. Samuel (seconded by Rebbi Yoḥanan in Babli *Pesaḥim* 101a/b) will agree to the conclusion from the Tosephta.. footnotes: ¹⁸⁵ The holiday of Sukkot is seven days; the eighth day, Shemini Aẓeret ¹⁸⁶ The obligation to live in the sukkah ¹⁸⁷ That it would no longer qualify as sukkah ¹⁸⁸ The sanctification of (Sabbath and) holidays, pronounced over a cup of wine. ¹⁸⁹ On Shemini Aẓeret ¹⁹⁰ This parallels the statement of Samuel in Babli Pesaḥim ¹⁹¹ The Venice text reads: Rebbi Joshua; the text here is from the Rome manuscript. The correct text is in the parallel in Sukkah ¹⁹² Contradicting the statement of Samuel, that Qiddush ¹⁹³ So that at the moment of recitation of Qiddush ¹⁹⁴ The explanation of R. Abun is impossible since then we would have two contradictory statements in the name of Rav. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said in his name that one must make the sukkah ¹⁹⁵ Scribal error for “Rav”. Since Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi requires that one eat in an invalid sukkah ¹⁹⁶ This seemingly unrelated topic is discussed here because it has an implicit relationship with the foregoing Tosephta and the Mishnah. According to R. Joshua ben Levi, one may make Qiddush ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:5 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:5) שָׁאֲלוּ אֶת בֶּן זוֹמָא מִפְּנֵי מַה בָּא לָהֶן יַיִן בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּזוֹן כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. אָמַר לָהֶן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בֵּית הַבְּלִיעָה פָּנוּי. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא הֲדָא אָמְרָה אֲהֵן דְּעָטִישׁ גַו מֵיכְלָא אֲסִיר לְמֵימַר לֵיהּ יַיס בְּגִין סַכַּנְתָּא דְּנַפְשָׁא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** They asked Ben Zoma¹⁹⁷ 4:12, Babli 43a.: Why, if wine was served to them in the middle of the meal, everyone makes the benediction for himself? He said to them, because the place of swallowing is not empty¹⁹⁸. Rebbi Mana said, this means that if someone sneezes during the meal one may not say to him “for health¹⁹⁹ reads here זפ, Greek ζήτω “for life!” The Tosephta (*Šabbat* 7:5) declares this to be a non-Jewish custom.” because of danger to one’s life. footnotes: ¹⁹⁷ Tosephta Berakhot ¹⁹⁸ Talking during swallowing may bring food into one’s windpipe and cause one’s death by asphyxiation. ¹⁹⁹ Greek ἴασις. The Arukh ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:6 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:6:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:6:6) וְאוֹמֵר עַל הַמּוּגְמָר. מַה בֵּין מוּגְמָר וּבֵין יַיִן. מוּגְמָּר כּוּלָּן מֵרִיחִין. יַיִן אֶחָד הוּא טוֹעֵם. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רַב יִרְמְיָה מוּגְמָר כֵּיוָן שֶׁהֶעֱלָה עָשָׁן צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְעָא מִיבְדּוֹק לְרִבִּי זְעוּרָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ כֵּיצַד הוּא אוֹמֵר עַל שֶׁמֶן עָרֵב. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בְּשֶׁמֶן עָרֵב. אָמַר לֵיהּ אֲשֶׁר נָתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בַּעֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים. יִצְחָק בַּר אַבָּא בַּר מְחַסְיָה וְרַב חֲנַנְאֵל הֲווּן יָתְבִין חַד אֲמַר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁנָּתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בַּעֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים. וְחָרָנָה אֲמַר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁנָּתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בְּעֵשֶׂב הָאָרֶץ. מָתִיב מַן דָּמַר בְּעֵשֶׂב הָאָרֶץ לְמָן דֵּמָר בַּעֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים. וְכִי עֵצִים הֵן. אָמַר לֵיהּ וְהָכְתִיב וַתִּטְמְנֵם בְּפִשְׁתֵּי הָעֵץ. וְכִי עֵצִים הֵן. סָלְקִין לְבֵית רַב וְשָׁמְעוֹן [רַב] חוּנָה בְּשֵׁם רַב אֲשֶׁר נָתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בַּעֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים. גָּנִיבָא אָמַר שֶׁמֶן לְזוּהֲמָה אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן וַאֲפִילוּ קָוִוי לְתוֹךְ יָדוֹ. רִבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ רַב הוּנָא בְשֵׁם רַב הַמְּרַבֵּץ אֳלֵינְתִּית בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא עַל כּוּלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר אֲשֶׁר נָתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בַּעֲצֵי בְּשָׂמִים. בָּר מִן אֲהֵן מוֹסְכִין דְּיֵימַר אֲשֶׁר נָתַן רֵיחַ טוֹב בְּמִינֵי בְּשָׂמִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** What is the difference between *mugmar* and wine? Everybody smells *mugmar*, each person tastes wine. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Jeremiah²⁰⁰: One has to recite the benediction for *mugmar* as soon as the smoke rises. Rav²⁰¹ Jeremiah wanted to examine Rebbi Zeïra. He said to him, which benediction does one recite on perfumed oil? He said, “He Who gave pleasant fragrance in perfumed oil.” He said to him, “He Who gave pleasant fragrance in spice wood.” Isaac bar Abba from Meḥasiah²⁰² and Rav Ḥananel were sitting. One said, “Praise to Him Who gave pleasant fragrance in spice wood.” The other one said, “Praise to Him Who gave pleasant fragrance in the plants of the earth.” He who said “in the plants of the earth” objected to him who said “in spice wood”: are they wood? He answered him, is it not written (*Jos.* 2:6) “She hid them in the hemp of wood”, are these wood? They went to the Yeshivah of Rav and heard Rav Huna²⁰³ in the name of Rav: “He Who gave pleasant fragrance in spice wood.” Ganiva said, he who uses oil for dirt²⁰⁴ does not have to recite a benediction. Rebbi Yudan said, even if he collects it into his hand. Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: He who sprinkles *olentia*²⁰⁵ “sweet smelling” (E. G.). Most authors equate the word with *oleamentum*, “ointment made from olive oil”; this fits neither the spelling of the word nor the context. in his house²⁰⁶ does not have to recite a benediction. Rav Ḥisda said, on everything he recites “He Who gave pleasant fragrance in spice wood” except for musk on which he recites “He who gave pleasant fragrance in all kinds of spices.²⁰⁷” footnotes: ²⁰⁰ The entire discussion is paralleled in Babli 43a/b. ²⁰¹ The text, “Rebbi”, is in error since Rebbi Zeïra was the student of Rav Jeremiah in Babylonia and the teacher of Rebbi Jeremiah in Galilee. ²⁰² A Babylonian; twice mentioned as associate of Rav Ḥananel. Mata (“City of”) Meḥasia was the place of Rav’s Yeshivah. ²⁰³ Head of the Yeshivah of Rav after Rav’s death. ²⁰⁴ If the oil is used primarily for cleaning and it does not matter that it is perfumed This applies to all other cleaning fluids also. ²⁰⁵ Latin olens, olentis ²⁰⁶ If the main intent is to either bind the dirt or to get rid of bad odors, not to produce the pleasant fragrance. ²⁰⁷ Musk is of animal, not vegetable, origin. The statement of Rav Ḥisda in the Babli is quoted in the name of Rav; but there the benediction for musk is accepted for everything except for balsamum. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:7:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:7:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:7:1) **משנה:** הֶבִיאוּ לְפָנָיו מְלִיחַ וּפַת עִמּוֹ מְבָרֵךְ עַל הַמְּלִיחַ וּפוֹטֵר אֶת הַפַּת שֶׁהַפַּת טְפֵילָה לוֹ. זֶה הַכְּלָל כָּל שֶׁהוּא עִיקָּר וְעִמּוֹ טְפֵילָה מְבָרֵךְ עַל הָעִיקָּר וּפוֹטֵר אֶת הַטְּפֵילָה. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** If salted fish²⁰⁸ who quotes the Mishnah *Nedarim* 6:3: “He who makes a vow not to eat any salted foods, is forbidden only salted fish.” was brought before him with bread, one recites the benediction over the salted fish and frees the bread²⁰⁹ because the bread is accessory. The following is the principle: Anything that is the main dish and comes with a side dish, one recites the benediction on the main dish and this frees the side dish. footnotes: ²⁰⁸ This is the usual interpretation of “salted” and is the correct interpretation of Mishnah and Yerushalmi by the testimony of the Arukh ²⁰⁹ From having to recite the benediction because salted fish cannot be eaten without bread; hence, the bread would not have been eaten were it not for the salted fish. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:7:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:7:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:7:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן מַתְנִיָיתָא עַד שֶׁלֹּא לָמְדוּ סְעוּדַת מְלָכִים וּבִמְקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשִׂין אֶת הַמְּלִיחַ עִיקָּר. אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין אֶת הַמְּלִיחַ עִיקָּר לָא בְדָא. רִבִּי יִרְמְיָה בְשֵׁם רַב פִּיתָּא וּפֵרוּר אוֹמֵר עַל הַפֵּירוּר בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשִׂין אֶת הַפֵּירוּר עִיקָּר. אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין אֶת הַפֵּירוּר עִיקָּר לָא בְדָא. רִבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶן לָקִישׁ שְׁקִיזְמִי וּפִיתָּא אוֹמֵר עַל הַשְּׁקִיזְמִי בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁעוֹשִׂין אֶת הַשְּׁקִיזְמִי עִיקָּר. אֲבָל בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין עוֹשִׂין אֶת הַשְּׁקִיזְמִי עִיקָּר לָא בְדָא. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan²¹⁰: The Mishnah was from before they learned royal meals and at a place where the salted fish is the main food, but at a place where salted fish is not the main food that does not apply²¹¹. Rav²¹² Jeremiah in the name of Rav, *pitta* bread and morsels, one recites on the morsels at a place where the morsels are the main food²¹³”. The authorities involved here are all Babylonian.. But at a place where morsels are not the main food that does not apply. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, *šeqizmi*²¹⁴ (Margalit), followed by Levy in his dictionary, takes the word to mean a delicacy made from almonds (שקד) with ז replacing soft ד. *Pne Mosheh* (Ben Ḥabib) identifies *šeqizmi* as kinds of fruit.] and bread, one recites on the *šeqizmi* at a place where the *šeqizmi* are the main food. But at a place where *šeqizmi* are not the main food that does not apply. footnotes: ²¹⁰ Israeli Amora of the first generation, close to R. Joshua ben Levi, Rebbi Ḥiyya the Great and R. Ḥanina. ²¹¹ Hence, for the Babli (44a) it no longer applies. ²¹² Again, “Rebbi” is scribal error. ²¹³ This does not contradict the stament in Halakhah 1 that one makes the benediction on a complete loaf of bread if at all possible since the morsels here are not eaten as morsels, but are collected and milk is poured over them; the whole is left standing until it gets moldy. The result was considered in Babylonia to be an exquisite delicacy called “Babylonian kutaḥ ²¹⁴ An unidentified word. [Pne Mosheh ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:1 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:8:1) **משנה:** אָכַל תְּאֵנִים וַעֲנָבִים וְרִימּוֹנִים מְבָרֵךְ עֲלֵיהֶן שָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת דִּבְרֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים בְּרָכָה אַחַת מֵעֵין שָׁלֹשׁ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר אֲפִילוּ אָכַל שֶׁלֶק וְהוּא מְזוֹנוֹ מְבָרֵךְ עָלָיו שָָׁלֹשׁ בְּרָכוֹת. הַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם לְצָמְאוֹ אוֹמֵר שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן אוֹמֵר בּוֹרֵא נְפָשׁוֹת רַבּוֹת. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **MISHNAH:** One who ate figs, grapes, or pomegranates²¹⁵ recites for them three benedictions²¹⁶, the words of Rabban Gamliel; but the Sagessay, one benediction imitating three. Rebbi Aqiba says, even if one ate cooked food and that is his meal he recites for it three benedictions²¹⁷ 8:10) “When you will eat and will have been satiated then you must praise the Eternal, your God, for the good land that He has given you.” There is no mention of bread. The three benedictions are (1) for the food, (2) for the Land, (3) for Jerusalem.. He who drinks water for his thirst²¹⁸ says “By Whose word everything was created.” Rebbi Tarphon²¹⁹ said, “Creator of many living things”²²⁰. footnotes: ²¹⁵ Or any other of the “Seven Fruits” that has not been made into bread; see note 15. ²¹⁶ Full grace; this Mishnah is the introduction to the subject of Grace which will occupy the next two chapters. ²¹⁷ Since the verse says: (Deut. ²¹⁸ He drinks water for itself and not to accompany or wash down food. ²¹⁹ Probably the Greek name Τρυφῶν. He was old enough to have served as a priest in the Temple before its destruction. The text of the Yerushalmi in the Halakhah, a manuscript of the Babli, and some quotes from Medieval authorities have “R. Yehudah” instead of “R. Tarphon”. Since the main thrust of the Mishnah is about concluding benedictions, it is not clear whether R. Tarphon/Yehudah speaks of a first benediction, contradicting R. Aqiba, or about the concluding benediction for food that needs neither “three benedictions” nor “one benediction imitating three.” ²²⁰ Some Mishnah manuscripts have here the full text of the minor benediction after food. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:2 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:8:2) **הלכה:** רִבִּי סִימוֹן רִבִּי תַּדַּאי בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי [הוֹשַׁעְיָא] אָכַל בְּמִזְרָחָהּ שֶׁל תְּאֵינָה וּבָא לֶאֱכוֹל בְּמַעֲרָבָהּ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. אַבָּא בַּר רַב חוּנָא אָמַר יַיִן יָשָׁן יַיִן חָדָשׁ צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. שִׁינּוּי יַיִן אֵין צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. שִׁינּוּי מָקוֹם צָרִיךְ לְבָרֵךְ. הִסִּיעַ דַּעְתּוֹ כְּמִי שֶׁהוּא שִׁינּוּי מָקוֹם. רִבִּי עַל כָּל חָבִית וְחָבִית שֶׁהָיָה פוֹתֵחַ הָיָה מְבָרֵךְ עָלֶיהָ. וּמַה הָיָה אוֹמֵר. רִבִּי יִצְחָק רוּבָּה בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי בָּרוּךְ הַטּוֹב וְהַמֵּטִיב. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה שֶׁעָשָׂה מִשְׁתֶּה לְשִׁמְעוֹן בְּנוֹ עַל כָּל חָבִית וְחָבִית שֶׁהָיָה פוֹתֵחַ הָיָה מְבָרֵךְ עָלֶיהָ וְאוֹמֵר חַמְרָא טָבָא לְחַיֵּי רַבָּנָן וּלְתַלמִידֵיהוֹן. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** **HALAKHAH:** Rebbi Simon, Rebbi Thaddeus²²², in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: If one ate East of a fig tree and then changed to West of it²²³ to eat, he must make a benediction. Abba bar Rav Huna said: old wine, new wine, he has to recite a benediction²²⁴. Change of wine he does not have to make a benediction. Change of place he has to make a benediction. If he took his mind off²²⁵ it is equal to change of place. Rebbi was reciting a benediction on any wine amphora that he was opening. What did he say? The old Rebbi Isaac in the name of Rebbi: “He Who is good and does good²²⁶.” When Rebbi Aqiba was making a marriage feast for his son Simeon, he said a benediction over every wine amphora that he opened and said: “Good wine for the rabbis and their students.” footnotes: ²²² Israeli Amora of the second generation. His sayings are reported either by R. Simon or by R. Abba. ²²³ Assuming that the fig tree is very old and large enough so that he cannot see his old place from the new one. ²²⁴ Since the benediction, as explained later in this Halakhah, is for the quality of the wine, one would expect that the change from new to old wine should require a benediction rather than the other way around. However, one has to assume that one deals with wine stored in cheap pottery amphoras rather than in extremely expensive glass bottles. The amphoras are porous and most of the alcohol will have vanished by the time the amphora is opened and also the flavor will have deteriorated under the influence of the air seeping in from the outside. Hence, the text here is justified. ²²⁵ After some time has passed. If one then returns to drink, it is a new activity. ²²⁶ Benediction on getting good news. ###### Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:3 [Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 6:8:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Jerusalem%20Talmud%20Berakhot/r/6:8:3) הַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם לְצָמְאוֹ אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁהַכֹּל נִהְיֶה בִּדְבָרוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה חוּץ מִמֵּי דְּקָרִים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וּלְכָל מַיִם שֶׁהוּא צָמֵא לָהֶן. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבוּן הַשּׁוֹתֶה מֵי דְּקָרִים מַהוּ אוֹמֵר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁבָּרָא מֵי רְפוּאוֹת. אִית תְּנָיֵי תַנִּי מֵי דְקָרִים. וְאִית תְּנָיֵי תַנִּי מֵי דְקָלִים. מַאן דָּמַר מֵי דְקָרִים שֶׁהֵן דּוֹקְרִין אֶת הַמָּרָה. וּמַן דָּמַר מֵי דְקָלִים שֶׁהֵן יוֹצְאִין מִבֵּין שְׁנֵי דְּקָלִים. **The Jerusalem Talmud, translation and commentary by Heinrich W. Guggenheimer. Berlin, De Gruyter, 1999-2015:** “²²⁷ He who drinks water for his thirst says ‘That everything was created by His word.’” Rebbi Jonah said, except pick-axe water²²⁸. Rebbi Yose said, on any water that he thirsts for²²⁹. Rebbi Abun said, he who drinks pick-axe water, what does he say? “Praise to Him Who created medicinal waters.”²³⁰ Some Tannaïm state “*deqarim* water”, other Tannaïm state “*deqalim* waters”. He who said *deqarim* (pick-axe) waters, because they pierce the gall bladder. And he who says *deqalim* (date palm) waters, because they gush forth between two palm trees²³¹ “hard drinker”, one who is able to empty a *calix*, a goblet, at one draught (E. G.).. footnotes: ²²⁷ Quote from the Mishnah. ²²⁸ As is clear from the text, this is water drunk only for medicinal purposes. ²²⁹ If somebody drinks medicinal waters for his thirst, he has to recite the benediction for water, not that for medicinal waters. If he drinks water not for his thirst (in the language of the Babli, 44b, if a piece of food is stuck in his esophagus,) he does not have to recite any benediction. ²³⁰ The fact that a benediction is due is also noted in the Babli (38a), but the text is given only here. ²³¹ Compare Latin decalicator