Berakhot 48b (מח:) — the Talmud in English

And

the Gemara infers: It follows that only

joining together does he join them, but to discharge the many of their obligation

he does not discharge them

until he eats an olive-bulk of grain.

It was also stated: Rav Ḥana bar Yehuda said in the name of Rava: Even if he dipped with them only in brine, and ate with them only one dried fig, he joins them. But to discharge the many of their obligation, he does not discharge them until he eats an olive-bulk of grain.

Rav Ḥana bar Yehuda said in the name of Rava: The halakha is that if one ate a vegetable leaf and drank a cup of wine, he joins them

for the zimmun, but

to discharge

others through the Grace after Meals,

he does not discharge them until he eats an olive-bulk of grain.

Rav Naḥman said: Moses instituted for Israel the blessing of Sustenance

when the manna descended for them .

Joshua instituted for them the blessing of the Land once they entered the Land.

David and Solomon instituted

the blessing of

Builder of Jerusalem,

and each of them instituted part of the blessing:

David instituted “for Your people Israel and for Your city Jerusalem,” and Solomon instituted “for the great and holy House.”

The blessing of

“Who is good and does good” was instituted in Yavneh, corresponding to those killed at Beitar.

For Rav Mattana said: On the day on which those slain at Beitar were granted burial, they instituted in Yavneh “Who is good and does good.”

“Who is good”

—because the bodies did not decompose; “and does good”

—because they were granted burial.

It follows that the blessing of “Who is good and does good” is rabbinic [and below there is a dispute concerning this].

The Sages taught: The order of the Grace after Meals

is as follows: The first blessing

—the blessing of Sustenance; the second

—the blessing of the Land; the third

—Builder of Jerusalem; the fourth

—“Who is good and does good.”

And

also

on Shabbat,

one need not open and conclude the third blessing with a reference to Shabbat, but

begins with consolation,

with a petition for consolation through the rebuilding of Jerusalem,

and concludes with consolation, and mentions the sanctity of the day in the middle.

Rabbi Eliezer says: If he wished to recite it

the sanctity of the day

in the blessing of consolation

—he recites it; in the blessing of the Land

—he recites it; in the blessing instituted by the Sages in Yavneh

—he recites it.

And the Sages say: He recites it only in the blessing of consolation.

The Gemara asks: Are the words of

the Sages,

who say that he recites it in the blessing of consolation,

not identical

to the words of

the first tanna?

The Gemara explains:

The difference between them concerns a case after the fact.

This is a case in which he forgot and did not mention it in the blessing of consolation. According to the first tanna, he may mention it in “Who is good and does good,” whereas according to the Sages, “he recites it only in the blessing of consolation.” If he forgot, he must return to the beginning.

The Sages taught: From where is the Grace after Meals derived from the Torah? -

The opinion of Tosafot above [ 16a, s.v. “and concludes,” and 46b, s.v. “and according to the one”] is that the Grace after Meals contains three blessings required by the Torah, and if one does not know the entire Grace after Meals, he should not recite any blessing [see page 46a, notes 16–18]. However, Kesef Mishne [ Blessings 2:2] proved that according to Maimonides and Ramban only the obligation to recite Maimonides and Ramban, only the obligation to recite the blessing for sustenance is from the Torah, whereas the sources cited by the beraita for the other blessings are merely scriptural supports. Magen Avraham [ 194:3] inferred from the words of Ramban [ Milḥamot Hashem, above 46a] that the blessings of the Grace after Meals do not prevent one another, but there is no proof that one need not mention the subjects of all three blessings within a single blessing; see Nishmat Adam [ 47a]. In Zikhron Shmuel [ 21:2], it was asked: If the blessings do not prevent one another, why must one who forgot a mention repeat the entire Grace after Meals, rather than only “Who builds Jerusalem”? It must be that even though they do not prevent one another, they are not separate blessings; rather, they are included in one mitzva. Although if one omitted one, he may recite it out of order, the mitzva of mentioning them is fulfilled through a complete Grace after Meals, and therefore he repeats all of it. -

As it is stated

[Deuteronomy 8:10]:

“And you shall eat and be satisfied

and bless”

—this is the blessing of Sustenance.

“The Lord your God”

—this is the blessing of the zimmun.

The Vilna Gaon read the passage as follows: “And you shall bless” — this is the blessing of the invitation; “the Lord your God” — this is the blessing for sustenance. Tosafot above [ 46a, s.v. “until”] also cited this version.

“Upon the Land”

—this is the blessing of the Land,

“the good”

—this is

the blessing of

Builder of Jerusalem. And so it says

[Deuteronomy 3:25]:

“This good mountain and the Lebanon.”

“Which He gave you”

—this is

the blessing of

“Who is good and does good.”

And this beraita maintains that the blessing of “Who is good and does good” is also mandated by Torah law.

I have

no source from the Torah that one must bless over food

except afterward. From where

do we know that one must bless before it?

You derive it by a kal va-chomer: When he is satiated he blesses; when he is hungry, is it not all the more so?

Rabbi says:

He need not

derive it by a kal va-chomer, for the verse is expounded as follows:

“And you shall eat and be satisfied and bless” -

—this is the blessing of Sustenance.

But the blessing of the zimmun is derived from “Exalt the Lord with me.”

“Upon the Land”

—this is the blessing of the Land.

“The good”

—this is Builder of Jerusalem, and so it says, “This good mountain and the Lebanon.”

But the blessing of

“Who is good and does good”

is not from the Torah, because only

in Yavneh was it instituted.

I have derived only the blessing afterward; from where

does one derive it?

—One must bless also

once He has given it to you.

Rabbi Yitzḥak says: He need not

derive it from “which He gave you,” because

it says

[Exodus 23:25]:

“And He will bless your bread and your water,”

and it is expounded as follows:

Do not read “and He will bless”

as an expression of promise,

but “and bless,”

which is an expression of command; its meaning is that you must bless over your bread.

And when is it called “bread”? Before you eat it.

Rabbi Natan says: He need not

derive it by a kal va-chomer or from an exposition of the verses, because

it says

explicitly [I Samuel 9:13], when Saul asked the women of the city of Samuel the prophet where he was, they answered him:

“As soon as you enter the city, you will find him, before he goes up to the high place to eat; for the people will not eat until he comes, because he will bless the sacrifice, and afterward those who are invited will eat.”

Thus, one must bless before eating.

And

the Gemara explains the reason

for such

a lengthy answer concerning how they would find him:

Why?

Because women are talkative.

And Samuel said

that they lengthened their words

in order to gaze upon Saul’s beauty, as it is written

[there, verse 2]:

“From his shoulders and upward he was taller than any of the people.”

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Because one kingdom does not encroach

upon another even by a hairsbreadth

[like a strand of hair; that is, a precise time was fixed for each kingdom, and one king does not reign during the time of another even for a single moment]. Since Samuel was transferring the leadership of Israel to Saul, this slight delay was necessary so that Saul would not arrive before the time of his reign.

Continuation of the beraita

And I have

no source from the Torah that one must bless

except

over

the Grace after Meals. The blessing over the Torah

from where?

Above [21a], the blessing over Torah before studying was derived from a verse, and the blessing afterward from an a-fortiori inference. The inference was refuted, since with food one derives benefit, and this refutation also applies to Rabbi Yishmael’s a-fortiori inference. This also appears from the words of Rashba, who understood that here the discussion concerns the blessing afterward, whose obligation is in fact only rabbinic. However, Makhon Yom Tov [ chapter 1, section 13] wrote that the beraita here discusses the blessing over Torah after public reading. Since this is only a rabbinic institution, the blessing is certainly not from the Torah, and therefore the refutation was not explained; the source from the verse is merely a scriptural support. On the other hand, he wrote [chapter 6, section 16] that the refutation, “since one derives benefit,” applies only to a blessing afterward, since one has already derived benefit, whereas here the discussion concerns a blessing beforehand [as is also explained by Ritva and Penei Yehoshua [ 21a]]. In Mareh HaPanim on the Jerusalem Talmud it was Mareh HaPanim on the Jerusalem Talmud [7:1], it was maintained that the discussion concerns a blessing beforehand, and this was raised as a difficulty against Ramban [ additions to Sefer HaMitzvot, commandment 15], who maintained that its obligation is from the Torah. In fact, the source of this beraita is the Mekhilta of Rabbi Yishmael [end of Parashat Bo], where the discussion concerns both the blessing beforehand and the blessing afterward.

Rabbi Yishmael said: It is a kal va-chomer,

for if

over temporal life one blesses, over the life of the World to Come

is it not all the more so!

Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Naḥmani, the student of Rabbi Yishmael, says in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: He need not

derive the blessing over the Torah by a kal va-chomer, because

it says

in the Grace after Meals [Deuteronomy 8:10]: “

over the good Land that He gave you

and you shall bless the Lord your God

over the good Land that He gave you”; and elsewhere it says

[Exodus 24:12]:

“And I shall give you the stone tablets, and the Torah and the mitzva, and so on,”

and regarding everything concerning which “giving” is stated, one must recite a blessing over it.

Rabbi Meir says: From where is it derived that just as one blesses for the good, so one blesses for the bad? –

The verse states

“which the Lord your God has given you,”

and he expounds the mention of the Name according to the attribute of mercy [“the Lord”] and according to the attribute of justice [“your God”], teaching that one is obligated to bless for the attribute of justice just as for the attribute of mercy, because the Holy One, blessed be He, is

your Judge in every judgment by which He judges you, whether it is a measure of goodness

—the Torah, for which one blesses for its being given to us—

or a measure of punishment.

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: It is not necessary

to derive the blessing over the Torah from the language of giving used with regard to it, because

it says “for the good land,” and this contains two superfluous elements

“good” did not need to be written

“good,”

because it had already been mentioned earlier that it is a good land; and, secondly, He added the definite article and wrote

“the good,”

which necessarily refers to the Torah, because

“good” –

this is Torah, and so it says

(Proverbs 4:2)

“For I have given you a good teaching,”

and this is the source for the blessing over the Torah. But

“the good”

with the definite article –

this is the building of Jerusalem, and so it says: “This good mountain and the Lebanon.”

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who did not say “a desirable, good, and spacious land”

in the blessing of the land, and “the kingdom of the House of David” in the blessing for the building of Jerusalem,

has not fulfilled his obligation.

Rabbeinu Yonah explained that when one mentions the land, one must mention its praise, and the Land of Israel was called “desirable” [Jeremiah 3:19] and “good and spacious” [Exodus 3:8]. And in Shibbolet HaLeket (157) it is written that Joshua saw how Moses our teacher yearned to enter it; and once Joshua merited entering there, he instituted that his blessing should say “a desirable land.” For Jerusalem was sanctified through David [Rashi, s.v. “the kingdom”]. And the Meiri explained that there is no complete consolation in the building of Jerusalem without the kingdom of the House of David. The Rishonim disagree whether one who did not say these details has not fulfilled his obligation at all and must repeat the blessing, or whether he has merely not fulfilled his obligation properly but does not repeat it. See Tur and Beit Yosef Nahum the Elder says One must mention in (187).

Nahum the Elder says: One must mention in it

in the blessing of the land

“covenant,”

because it was given to Abraham our forefather through a covenant, at the Covenant between the Pieces.

Rabbi Yosei says: One must mention in it

in the blessing of the land also

“Torah,”

because they inherited the land also by virtue of the Torah, as it is stated [Deuteronomy 8:1]: “You shall faithfully observe every commandment that I command you today, so that you may live and multiply and enter and possess the land that the Lord swore to your fathers.”

Pelimo says: One must mention the covenant before the Torah,

and say: “For Your covenant that You sealed in our flesh and for Your Torah that You taught us,” because

this

—the Torah—

was given through three covenants

and they are: (a) at Mount Sinai and in the Tent of Meeting; (b) in the plains of Moab; (c) at Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal.