Berakhot 39a (לט.) — the Talmud in English

But

since it was removed from its pit

the measure is deficient!

For the measure of an olive-bulk required for a concluding blessing also includes the pit, whereas Rabbi Yohanan did not eat the pit, but only the fruit!? b. The view of Rabbeinu Yonah is that one who eats less than the requisite measure should always recite the blessing of “Shehakol” at the outset, and not the blessing instituted for that particular species. And the Beit Yosef (section 210) wrote that from the words of Tosafot and the Rosh it appears that they disagree with him and maintain that one should recite over each species its appropriate blessing even when he eats less than the requisite measure of it. And this is explicit in the words of the Rambam (Chapter 3, halakha 12).

He said to him: Do you maintain

that the measure of

a large olive-bulk is required

for a concluding blessing?

A medium olive-bulk is required; and the olive that they brought before Rabbi Yohanan—

it was a large olive, for although they removed its pit

[they took out the pit],

there remained

[of it]

the requisite measure

of a medium olive-bulk.

As we learned in a mishna: The olive-bulk that they said

to use for measuring

is neither a small one nor a large one, but rather a medium one, and this is

the

“aguri” olive.

And Rabbi Abbahu said: Its name is not “aguri,” but rather its name is “avroti”; and some say: Its name is “samrusi.” And why is it called “aguri”—

because its oil is gathered within it,

and is ready to emerge, and it is not like mere “sweat” that emerges from other fruits that have been squeezed.

The Gemara returns to discuss the blessing over cooked vegetables:

Let us say

that the law concerning the blessing recited over cooked vegetables is

subject to a dispute between tanna’im.

For there were these two students who were sitting before bar Kappara; they brought before him cabbage and durmaskin

[a type of herb or a particular type of cabbage] which are eaten only when cooked,

and young fowl,

cooked young birds.

Bar Kappara gave one of them permission to recite a blessing

and thereby fulfill the initial blessing obligation of those reclining with him.

One student sprang forward

without asking bar Kappara over which of them he should recite a blessing first,

and recited a blessing over

the young fowl, “Shehakol nihyeh bidvaro” (“Everything came to be through His word”).

His fellow mocked him

for choosing to recite the blessing of “Shehakol” first over the young fowl, rather than first reciting “Who creates the fruit of the earth” over the cooked vegetables.

[The reasoning of these two students will be explained shortly.]

Bar Kappara became angry

and

said: I am not angry with the one who recited the blessing; rather, I am angry with the one who mocked.

For even

if your fellow resembles one who has never tasted the taste of meat in his life,

since the young fowl were so dear to him that he gave precedence to their blessing, as explained in the laws of precedence, that one should first recite a blessing over the food that he prefers,

—

why did you mock him?

Bar Kappara reconsidered

and

said: I am not angry with the one who mocked; rather, I am angry with the one who recited the blessing.

And

bar Kappara said to explain his reproach: Even

if there is no wisdom here,

meaning, you do not think that I am the scholar whom you should ask which blessing should be given precedence, but

is there no elder here?!

You should have treated me with honor and asked me which blessing should be recited first.

A tanna taught: And neither of them fulfilled the obligation of the one who gave permission.

What, is it not that they disagree about this,

the two students of bar Kappara:

The one who recited the blessing maintained: The cooked vegetables and the young fowl

have the same blessings, and over both one should recite

“Shehakol nihyeh bidvaro”;

therefore

he recited the blessing over the young fowl, which he preferred, because

the preferred item takes precedence!

One should recite the blessing over it and thereby exempt the less-preferred species.

But the one who mocked maintained: The cooked vegetables,

their blessing is

“Who creates the fruit of the earth,”

whereas the

young fowl

their blessing is

“Shehakol nihyeh bidvaro.”

Therefore, since their blessings are not the same,

it is preferable to give precedence to

the fruit, since the blessing “Who creates the fruit of the earth” is more significant than the blessing “Shehakol.”

The Gemara rejects this:

No,

this is not what bar Kappara’s students disputed. Rather,

everyone

maintains that

the cooked vegetables and the young fowl

their blessing is

“Shehakol nihyeh bidvaro.”

And here, they disagree about this principle: One,

who recited the blessing over the young fowl,

maintained:

Since their blessings are the same, the item that is

preferred

to

him

takes precedence

and one should recite the blessing over it.

But the other

who mocked him

maintained: Despite the preference for the young fowl,

cabbage takes precedence,

because it possesses the advantage

of being nourishing.

Rabbi Zeira said: When we were in the academy of Rav Huna

[when we were in Rav Huna’s beit-midrash],

he said to us: These heads of turnips,

which they had cut—if

they cut them in large pieces,

meaning that they cut them into large pieces, their blessing is

“Who creates the fruit of the earth,”

but if they cut them into

small pieces

[small pieces], their blessing is

“Shehakol nihyeh bidvaro.”

The cutting altered them for the worse, and consequently the designation of “fruit” no longer applies to them.

But when we came to the academy of Rav Yehuda, he said to us: Both this and that,

in every form of cutting, their blessing is

“Who creates the fruit of the earth.” And

the reason

that

he cut them more

was

so that

their taste would be sweetened

[to sweeten their taste]. Thus, the cutting altered them for the better and did not remove their designation as fruit; therefore, one recites over them “Who creates the fruit of the earth.”

Rav Ashi said: When we were in the academy of Rav Kahana, he said to us: A dish of beets [a dish of spinach],

in which there is not much flour,

meaning, the flour mixed into it is not abundant, one recites over it

“Who creates the fruit of the earth,”

whereas a dish

of turnips,

[a dish of “turnip”],

in which there is much more flour,

meaning, the flour mixed into it is abundant, one recites over it

—

“Who creates

various kinds of nourishment.”

But Rav Ashi then said

:

Both this and that,

the dish of beets and the dish of turnips—their blessing is

“Who creates the fruit of the earth,” and the reason he puts

into the dish of turnips

more flour

is not sufficient to determine the blessing of the dish, because

it is used merely to make it adhere.

[It is used to bind the dish, and not to impart flavor], and therefore it does not have sufficient significance for one to recite “Who creates various kinds of nourishment” because of it.

Rav Ḥisda said: A dish of spinach —

is beneficial for the heart and good for the eyes, and all the more so

that it is beneficial

for the intestines.

Abaye said: And this is the case when it sits on the stove

on the stove support and is thoroughly cooked,

and it makes

a sound during its cooking resembling

“tokh tokh.”

This is the sound heard when boiled and softened spinach is bubbling.

Rav Pappa said: It is obvious to me: The water of beet greens,

the water in which the spinach was cooked and which absorbed its flavor, its blessing is

like

the blessing of the

beet greens

themselves;

and

likewise,

the water of turnips

its blessing is

like

the blessing of the

turnips

themselves;

and

similarly,

the water of all cooked vegetables

its blessing is

like

the blessing of

all cooked vegetables .

Rav Pappa raised a dilemma: The water of dill [

water in which shevet, an aromatic plant, was cooked ] —

what

is its blessing?

The sides of the dilemma are as follows: Is the shevet added to a dish

to sweeten the flavor

of the dish

that it is used for,

and therefore the blessing over the dish’s water is Borei peri ha’adama, like the blessing of the shevet itself and in accordance with the law governing all vegetable cooking water?

Or

perhaps it is used only

to remove the foulness, it is used for that purpose —

the shevet is added to the dish only so that the “dirt” produced by the cooking will adhere to it.

The Gemara proves:

Come and hear: The “

s

e

b

et”

of teruma that was cooked —

once it has imparted flavor to the pot,

its flavor has been nullified within it, and from that point onward it is considered merely wood, and it

no longer has the status of

the sanctity of

teruma, and

likewise

it does not impart ritual impurity

for that reason

as food impurity,

since the designation “food” has already been nullified from it.

And from the language of the Mishna, which states, “The shevet, once it has imparted flavor to the pot,”

infer from it

that the “shevet”

is used to sweeten the flavor.

The Gemara concludes:

Infer from it.

Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said: Crumbled bread,

a dry slice of bread that

in a bowl

one recites HaMotzi over it,

and this disagrees with Rabbi Ḥiyya.

As Rabbi Ḥiyya said:

One who recites a blessing over bread

must complete the blessing

[finish reciting the blessing HaMotzi] together

with

the completion of breaking

the bread,

and it follows that in order to fulfill this rule one must recite the blessing over a whole loaf, contrary to the view of Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi .

Rava challenged Rabbi Ḥiyya: What is different about crumbled bread, regarding which you said that one should not recite the blessing over it but should prefer another loaf, because when the blessing is completed

when he completes the entire blessing

it is completed over a slice and not over a whole loaf?

But when he recites the blessing

over the bread

that is whole

as well, when he completes

the blessing [when he completes the blessing],

he completes it over a slice

and not over a whole loaf. What advantage, then, is there in reciting the blessing over a whole loaf?