Berakhot 42a (מב.) — the Talmud in English

The Gemara explains:

Wine is different

from other things, since it is important: since it

generates its own blessing

, even when one does not wish to drink it, such as in Kiddush, when the Sages required that it be recited over a cup of wine.

Rav Huna ate thirteen loaves

[thirteen loaves] of pat haba’a bekisin,

three by three to a kav

[meaning that each three constituted one kav; consequently, he ate the measure of four kav],

and he did not recite a blessing

after them, Birkat HaMazon.

Rav Naḥman said to him: They were eaten because of hunger,

[they were eaten to satisfy hunger]. For he ate a large quantity of them, as one eats a fixed meal, and not as one eats for dessert, which is a small amount. In such a case, even though the food itself was not the basis of his meal, his eating is not exempt from a blessing.

Rather, anyone

who ate the measure

over which others establish a meal—

must recite a blessing

over it as over bread: HaMotzi at the beginning and Birkat HaMazon at the end.

Rav Yehuda was occupied with arranging his son’s marriage [engaged in his son’s marriage] with

Rav Yehuda was occupied with arranging his son’s marriage

[he was occupied with his son’s marriage]

to

[the daughter of]

Rav Yehuda bar

Ḥaviva. They brought before them pat haba’a bekisin. When he arrived, he heard them reciting

over it

“HaMotzi.” He said to them: What are these sounds that I hear?

[What are the sounds that I hear,]

perhaps you are reciting “Who brings forth bread from the earth”?

But one should recite over it Borei Minei Mezonot.

They said to him: Yes!

Indeed, we recited HaMotzi because

it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Mona said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: Over pat haba’a bekisin—

one recites HaMotzi. And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

He said to them,

Rav Yehuda:

The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Mona.

It was stated: They said to

Rav Yehuda:

But it was you, Master, who said in the name of Shmuel: Small loaves

resembling pat haba’a bekisin have the status of bread, and therefore

one may establish an eruv with them

for an eruv ḥatzerot, even though specifically bread must be placed,

and one recites HaMotzi over them.

If so, the same law should apply: one should recite HaMotzi over pat haba’a bekisin.

He said to them:

That case is different:

the reason one recites HaMotzi is

that he established his meal over them; but where he did not establish his meal over them, one does not

recite HaMotzi, but only Borei Minei Mezonot.

Rav Pappa happened to come to the house of Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan. After they had finished their meal, they brought before them something

to eat. Rav Pappa took it and ate.

They said to him:

But does

the Master not accept

the halakha that if one

finished

his meal and then changed his mind and decided to continue eating,

it is forbidden to eat

until he recites Birkat HaMazon over the meal he has already eaten and recites an initial blessing over what he now wishes to eat? The initial blessing he recited at the beginning of the meal does not exempt his subsequent eating, because once he finished eating, he diverted his attention from the meal.

He said to them:

The halakha you cited does not apply when one merely finished eating, for mere intention is insufficient to conclude his meal and obligate him to recite a blessing if he later changes his mind and wishes to continue eating. Rather,

“He removed [the food],” was stated:

This halakha was stated only when he actually performed an act and removed the bread and other foods from the table. Only then, if he changes his mind and wishes to continue eating, is he forbidden to do so until he recites another blessing.

Rava and Rabbi Zeira happened to come to the house of the Exilarch

and ate there.

After the table had been removed from before them

[after they removed the table from before them],

they sent them a rishtana

[a portion of cooked meat]

from the house of the Exilarch.

Rava ate, but Rabbi Zeira did not eat.

He said to him,

Rabbi Zeira said to Rava: But does

the Master not accept

the halakha that if he has already

removed

the bread and other foods from the table,

it is forbidden to eat!?

He said to him,

Rava said to Rabbi Zeira:

We

rely on the table of the Exilarch

[we rely on the table of the Exilarch], and therefore our intention depends on his intention: If he adds more food and gives it to us, we will eat. Consequently, our removal of the table is not considered a diversion of attention.

Rav said: One who is accustomed to using oil

to anoint his hands with after eating

—the oil prevents him from concluding the meal! Even if he has finished and removed the bread, this is not considered a distraction from his meal as long as he has not anointed his hands with oil; he may return and eat without an additional blessing.

Rav Ashi said: When we were in the school of Rav Kahana, he said to us: In a case such as ours, where we are accustomed to using oil—

the oil prevents us from concluding the meal.

But the halakha does not follow any of these statements,

which make the conclusion of the meal dependent on finishing eating, removing the food from the table, or already anointing one’s hands with oil,

but

the conclusion of the meal depends on washing one’s hands with mayim aharonim. Once one has washed his hands, the meal is considered concluded, and if he changes his mind and wishes to return to eating, he may not do so without first reciting a blessing.

As in the statement that Rabbi Hiyya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: There are three instances of immediacy:

there are three matters whose performance must follow one another immediately, and these are:

Immediately following semikha

of the owners upon the head of the offering

—slaughter;

there must be no interruption between them, whether by changing location or by a lapse of time.

Immediately following

the blessing of

“Redemption”

—prayer

of the Shemoneh Esrei. There must be no interruption between them at all.

Immediately following the washing of the hands

with mayim aharonim —

a blessing.

The Birkat HaMazon, without interrupting between them by eating .

Abaye said: We too shall say: Immediately following Torah scholars—

a blessing!

One who hosts a Torah scholar in his home is immediately privileged to have blessing rest in his home,

as it is stated

with regard to Laban, who said to Jacob:

“And the Lord has blessed me because of you” .

Alternatively, one may say that the proof is from here, as it is stated: “And the Lord blessed the Egyptian’s household because of Joseph.”

Mishna:

If one recited a blessing over the wine that he

drank

before the meal [

the meal]—

he exempts

from a blessing

the wine that he

drinks

after the meal .

If one recited a blessing over parperet

such as young fowl and fish

that he

ate

before the meal—

he exempts

from a blessing

the parperet

made of bread that comes with kisanin

that he

eats

after the meal.

If one recited a blessing over bread—

he exempts the parperet

that he eats .

If one

recited a blessing over the parperet

that he ate before the meal—

he did not exempt the bread,

because the bread is not subordinate to the parperet; rather, it is more important than it.

Beit Shammai say:

The parperet does not exempt

even cooked food [

types of porridge],

although their blessings are identical.

If they were sitting

and eating without reclining,

each one recites a blessing for himself,

and one of them cannot exempt the others with his blessing, because since they did not recline, they are not considered to have established themselves together for a meal, and they do not constitute a single group .

But if they

reclined

to eat, then since they established themselves to eat together while reclining —

one

recites the blessing

for all of them .