Berakhot 43a — the Talmud in English

He turned the tear in his garment backward,

turning the garment that had already been torn [at Rav’s eulogy] backward, so that the place of the tear, which had been in front of him, would be thrown behind him, and the place of the garment that remained intact behind him would be in front of him,

and he made another tear

over Rav, to show by this his mourning, that his loss was as difficult for him as the day of death, since now they felt his absence more, as there was no one to instruct them how to conduct themselves.

He said: Rav’s soul has departed, and

even the laws of

the blessing of food we did not complete

we did not manage to learn from him.

The students remained in their uncertainty

until that old man came,

and

he raised before them

he presented to Rav’s students the contradiction from

the Mishna against the beraita

as they had raised it above,

and he resolved it for them

as Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak had resolved it above,

since they said, “Let us go and eat bread in such-and-such a place”—

it is considered as though they reclined.

We learned in the Mishna:

If they reclined—

one recites the blessing

for all of them.

Rav said:

this rule, that only when they reclined does one recite the blessing for all of them,

was stated only with regard to bread, which requires reclining,

because, since bread is important, they were accustomed to eating it while reclining, in a fixed manner; and consequently, when they do not recline, this constitutes an indication that they wish to eat it in a temporary manner, in which case there is no joining among those eating.

But wine,

which is not as important as bread, and with whose drinking they were not accustomed to recline,

does not require reclining,

but even without their reclining, one exempts them all.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: wine also requires reclining,

because it has importance, and they are accustomed to drinking it while reclining; therefore, when they did not recline, one does not exempt the others .

Some say: Rav said:

this rule, that when they reclined one recites the blessing for all of them,

was stated only

with regard to

bread, for which reclining is effective

[for which reclining is beneficial], because, since it is important, reclining makes its eating be considered fixed eating, and those participating in the eating are considered established together.

But reclining is not effective for wine,

and even if they reclined, each one recites the blessing for himself. Since it is not so important, its drinking is not considered fixed, and therefore, even though they reclined while drinking it, there is no joining here.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: reclining is also effective for wine,

because wine too is important, and therefore, when they reclined, one recites the blessing for all of them .

An objection was raised: What is the order of reclining? Guests

who arrived first

enter and sit

and wait

on benches and on chairs until

they arrive and

all enter,

and while the first ones were waiting,

water was brought to them

and

each and every one

would

wash one hand,

with which he would receive a cup of wine that they were accustomed to drink before the meal ,

And when

there came to them

the

wine—

each and every one recites the blessing

over the wine

for himself,

since they had not yet reclined.

After all the guests had arrived and entered,

they went up

all onto the beds that were in another room,

and reclined, and water came to them

once again, and

even though each and every one

had already

washed one hand

before drinking the wine, he

washes again

now

both his hands

for eating the bread, since it is eaten with both hands .

After the washing,

wine came to them

once again.

Even though each and every one

had already

recited the blessing for himself

over the wine that he drank before they reclined, they must recite the blessing again over this wine an additional blessing. Indeed, for this drinking, since it is while reclining,

one recites the blessing for all of them.

The Gemara raises an objection from this beraita:

According to the first formulation

the first,

that Rav said: it was stated only with regard to bread, which requires reclining, but wine does not require reclining—

it is difficult

for him from the

beginning

of the beraita, which said that regarding the wine they drank at first, before reclining, each one recites the blessing for himself. Yet according to Rav, wine does not require reclining; rather, even if they drank it merely while sitting, one could exempt them all with his blessing.

The Gemara answers:

Guests are different

for they intend to uproot themselves.

Since this is not the place of reclining, but they intend to move from this place to another room, where they will recline, their drinking cannot be considered “fixed drinking,” because such temporary sitting certainly does not join those sitting together so that one may recite the blessing for all of them. Rav’s statement that wine does not require reclining applies when they drink wine outside the time of a meal, or during the meal and in the place of reclining.

The Gemara further raises an objection from this beraita:

And according to the second formulation

the latter,

that Rav said: it was stated only with regard to bread, for which reclining is effective, but reclining is not effective for wine—

it is difficult

for him from the

end

of the beraita, which said that regarding the wine they drank while reclining, one recites the blessing for all of them; yet according to Rav, reclining is not effective for wine?

The Gemara answers:

There it is different,

for they reclined for a meal of bread, and in such a case we say

that since

from

reclining is effective for bread

[that reclining is effective for them with regard to the bread], to consider those reclining as members of one group,

reclining is effective

this also

for wine

to consider them established together.

We learned in the Mishna:

If wine came to them during the meal—

each and every one recites the blessing for himself.

They asked Ben Zoma: Why did they say

in the Mishna

“If wine came to them during the meal, each and every one recites the blessing for himself; after the meal, one recites the blessing for all of them”?

He said to them: Since

in the middle of eating

the swallowing passage is not free

and the attention of those reclining is directed not to the one reciting the blessing but only to eating, and they do not intend to fulfill their obligation through his blessing .

We learned in the Mishna:

And he,

the one who recites the blessing over the wine,

recites

the blessing

over the incense,

and exempts them all from the obligation of the blessing.

The Gemara infers:

From the fact that it teaches

in the Mishna

“and he recites over the incense,” it follows

this implies that even

if there is

another person among those sitting there, who is

superior

[more important]

than him,

the one who recites the blessing over the wine—even so, they said that the one who recites the blessing over the wine should recite the blessing over the incense, because the one who began the concluding blessings completes them.

The Gemara adds that this law

supports Rav.

For Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: The one who washes his hands first at the end,

an important person who participated in the meal and honored one of those reclining by allowing him to wash his hands first for the final waters,

he is

the

designated

also

for the blessing

he is the one who recites Birkat HaMazon, and the important person should not be honored with it, because concerning one who begins a mitzva, to wash his hands with the final waters, they say to him: Complete it and recite the blessing .

Rav and Rabbi Ḥiyya were sitting before Rabbi at a meal. Rabbi said to Rav: Arise and wash your hands

[arise and wash your hands].

Rabbi saw him

Rabbi saw Rav

trembling

he was trembling, out of concern that Rabbi had seen that his hands were dirty, or that he had prolonged the meal excessively and was therefore rebuking him to hurry and wash his hands.

Rabbi Ḥiyya said to Rav

to Rav:

Son of nobles

[son of great ones], you need not fear that Rabbi saw something improper in you. Rather,

He is speaking to you about the blessing of food!

For by this Rabbi gave you permission to recite Birkat HaMazon, as we hold: the one who washes his hands with the final waters first—he recites Birkat HaMazon.

Rabbi Zeira said in the name of Rava bar Yirmeya: From when does one recite the blessing over the fragrance

of the incense?

When its column rises—

from the time that the smoke of the vapor rises and ascends.

Rabbi Zeira said to Rava bar Yirmeya:

How can one recite the blessing from the moment the vapor rises,

when he has not yet smelled it,

he has not yet benefited from the fragrance?

He said to him

Rava to Rabbi Zeira:

According to your reasoning,

that one must benefit and only afterward recite the blessing, why did you not also ask about one who comes to eat bread,

“Who brings forth bread from the earth,” which he recites

before eating it,

when

he still

has not eaten? Rather,

by necessity, since

his intention is to eat,

he may recite the blessing over the benefit that is about to come, even though he has not yet eaten,

here too, since

since

his intention is to smell,

he may recite the blessing over the benefit that is about to come, even though he has not yet smelled .

Rabbi Ḥiyya, son of Abba bar Naḥmani, said in the name of Rav Ḥisda in the name of Rav—and some say, Rav Ḥisda said in the name of Ze’iri: For all incense

one recites over them

when one comes to smell them, the blessing

“Who creates fragrant trees,”

and even though the wood has already burned, it is still possible to recite this blessing while the smoke rises and ascends .

Except

for

“musk,” which

is

from an animal,

it is formed and not from wood, and therefore its law is

that one recites over it

the blessing

“Who creates varieties of fragrances.”

An objection was raised: One recites “Who creates fragrant trees” only over the balsam of Rabbi’s house, over the balsam of the emperor’s house, and over myrtle everywhere,

and likewise all those similar to them. For in all these, one smells the wood while it still exists, and therefore one can recite over the wood “Who creates fragrant trees.” In contrast, with incense, the wood does not exist, but only the fragrance does—one recites “Who creates varieties of fragrances.” If so, why did those amoraim say that over all incense one should recite “Who creates fragrant trees”?!

The Gemara concludes:

A refutation.

Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Yitzḥak: This balsam oil,

balsam oil,

what blessing does one recite over it

when smelling it?

He said to him

Rav Yitzḥak:

Thus Rav Yehuda said

one recites over it

“Who creates the oil of our land,”

because balsam grows in Jericho [and on account of its fragrance the name of the city was called “Jericho”]”.

He said to him: Set aside Rabbi Yehuda, for the Land of Israel is beloved to him

do not bring proof for this law from Rabbi Yehuda, to whom the Land of Israel is exceedingly beloved, and therefore he mentions the Land of Israel in the blessing.

According to everyone

for the other people,

what

is the blessing for balsam oil?

He said to him: Thus Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

one recites over it

“Who creates fragrant oil” .

Rav Adda bar Ahava said: This kharsheta

[a fragrant wood called kusht],

one recites over it “Who creates fragrant trees,”

because one smells the wood itself.

But infused oil,

oil in which the kusht is hidden, and from which the fragrance of the spice hidden inside it emanates,

not

do we recite this blessing over its fragrance, since the kusht is not visible to us, but only the oil [and the oil does not itself cause the fragrance, so that one should recite the blessing over it] .

I Rav Kahana skazal: dazhe v sluchae masla, v kotorom byli zamocheny pryanosti,

blagoslovlyayut ego aromat, potomu chto v lyubom sluchae ono sohraneno v svoey forme i nakhoditsya pered nami, hotya ego nelzya uvidet,

no v sluchae masla s izmelchennoy pryanostyu,

masla, v kotorom izmelchali kust, —

ne

blagoslovlyayut ego, potomu chto, pomimo togo chto kust nelzya uvidet, on uzhe ne sohranilsya v svoey pervonachalnoy forme.

Nehardei skazali: dazhe v sluchae masla s izmelchennoy pryanostyu

blagoslovlyayut ego aromat, potomu chto, hotya kust sohranilsya v masle ne v svoey pervonachalnoy forme i ego nelzya razlichit glazami, on vse zhe schitaetsya blagovoniem, kotoroe nakhoditsya pered nami .